Fan Reviews (Star Trek Film) | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Fan Reviews (Star Trek Film)

This section of the site is for fans to write their reviews of the new Star Trek feature film. Reviews can contain spoilers, but no major spoilers (such as the final fates of key characters).

For consistency, each review should rank the film on a 1-10 (although feel free to add categories to rank).

As always, please be civil.

Comments»

1. Bo Zimmerman - May 5, 2009

I’m a Trekker who saw the movie on an IMAX screen in Austin, Texas on Monday, May the 5th (last night for me). I give the movie an overall 8/10.

After an all-too-brief character setup, the plot begins to move at a blinding speed, changing direction so many times that you had to pay close attention to keep track of what goals the various players were trying to accomplish at any given time. On this I will only add that while the story was certainly good hard sci-fi, I think they could have written just as fine a story without having the crew save the whole damn Federation One More Time. Still, the whole movie had me so enthralled, it seemed the credits were rolling only after a few subjective moments had passed. I almost cried.

The actors, considering the big shoes they had to fill, did a fine job. Chris Pine was good as Kirk, though it was apparant the brash confidence was forced out of him, as it waned at several key moments, and seemed overdone at others (though these were fewer). Zachary Quinto was not quite as subtle as Spock should have been played, though as a screen presence, he can sortof force you to overlook it. Karl Urban was completely awesome as McCoy — he stole every scene he was in, which was far too few. Anton Yelchin as Chekov was extremely entertaining. More entertaining than the original Chekov, if I’m allowed to say such things. The writing gave Scott and Uhura a bit more bredth than in previous Trek outings. This was good for Scott. For Uhura, I havn’t decided yet — you’ll see.

As far as adhering to Trek lore goes, they only hit the big points, and just enough details to get by. The Vulcans were logical (more logical than the in the TV series thank God), and had pointed ears in the right places. Earth still led a Federation of planets, and female crew wore mini-skirts. That said, the Enterprise herself was almost unrecognizable inside and out, except for a general shape. The Romulans WERE unrecognizable, though they havn’t really been interesting to me since TOS’s “The Balance of Terror” (an awesome episode, btw). The timeline itself is broken by a time-travel paradox, so some things can be forgiven. Still, I’m less of a stickler for this stuff than other Trekkers, so I deducted very few points for this.

And lastly, on the sets and the effects — they were incredible! The space battles visually enthralling, the sets were awesome if you can get past how different they are from TOS (I loved the new engine room, for instance). There were aliens and monsters that will blow your mind, which the only downer being a comedy-relief alien that (thankfully) gets very little play.

If you are a Star Trek fan who does not use the word “canon” to describe previous plots and sets, you will have more fun than you can stand. I’ll be at the Theater on Thursday to see it again, and probably won’t leave until sometime Monday morning.

2. JEFF - May 5, 2009

On April 23rd i was invited to a sneak peak of Star Trek. I must say that it was a great film those 2 hours just flew by. I’ll review the film in different parts starting with the acting.

Acting:
The Actors did a fantastic job assuming the roles. The biggest standouts to me were Karl Urban as Dr. McCoy, Zackery Quinto as the young Spock, Chris Pine as Kirk and Simon Pegg as Scotty. With Karl Urban i could definetly feel him channeling Deforest Kelley. John Cho, Zoe Saldana, Bruce Greenwood also do justice to their parts of Sulu, Uhura and Christopher Pike respectfully. Eric Bana as the Romulan Nero brings us one of the best villians in all of Star Trek even up to Khan’s level. The only actor i thought who could’ve done better was Anton Yelchin as Chekov. While Chekov did have some great moments in the movie Yelchin over does it with the Russian Accent and that sort of detracts from some of the suspencful scenes featuring Chekov. Perhaps the reason most people are going to see this movie is because Leonard Nimoy is in it playing the Older Spock. Nimoy doesn’t appear that much only he really only appears in 2 scenes but Spock’s interactions with the younger versions of The Enterprise Crew were some of the best scenes in the movie. The only other thing i can recommend is before you see the new film read Star Trek: Countdown trust me it’ll help you understand the plot more (iPhone and iPod Touch users can purchase all 4 issues from Itunes for 99 cents each). Overall i’d give the acting 10/10

Plot:
Being a prequel story we are treated to seeing the origins of Kirk and Spock as well as how the Enterprise crew met all within an alternate timeline caused by Nero. As this is an alternate timeline some events are different such as Captain Pike being with the Enterprise crew we all know and love. However we finally see events that characters have implied doing in previous movies such as Kirks Kobayashi Maru test. Overall it is a solid plot my only grip is that they didn’t explain Nero’s backstory enough but you can read about that in the Prequel Comic Star Trek: Countdown. The Plot gets a 10/10 from me.

Music:
We are treated to a fantastic score composed by Michael Giacchino. Giacchino scores harken back to previous Trek composers like Jerry Goldsmith, James Horner and of course Alexander Courage. Oh and he brings justice to the original theme which can be heard over the end credits. Once again 10/10.

SFX:
Something i’ve noticed about all the good Star Trek films Including this one. All of them have had their effects done at George Lucas’ Industrial Light & Music. The CGI Ships look like models and The Enterprise has never looked better (though some fans will debate with me on that statement.). ILM continues to do great work from the Transporter effects to the Phasers everything looks cool and feels right. 10/10

Overall:
I think its the best Star Trek movie. I intend to see it again a few more times mainly because i missed out on a few things (Like Randy Pauschs Cameo and The Tribble). A lot of the film is fanservice which is good because myself and the audience all clapped whenever we heard the characters say their iconic catchphrases. Fans will not be dissapointed and non fans will be able to get into The new movie without having to go back and see everything else. This movie receives a perfect score from me of 40/40.
BTW before anyone says anything i did use Anthony’s review for reference in some parts and fully support his opinion that everyone seeing the film should read Star Trek: Countdown.

3. Trekkie16 - May 5, 2009

I give the movie a 7.5/10.

Some thoughts:

Due to the altered timeline, they are able to break out of the”box” and explore aspects of their relationships and friendships that would have been impossible in the other timeline. This lays down the groundwork for future movies. I really enjoyed this aspect of the film.

I loved the humor and felt the timing of each actor was spot on.

At times, the movie felt like a comfortable pair of slippers where everything was familiar and gave me that warm fuzzy feeling I get when I watch a TOS episode for the 500th time.

There were however, a couple moments that made me cringe. There was one plot point that I felt was a bit silly and seemed more like a scene from a comic book movie then Star Trek. There was another key scene that I wish the writers had taken a different direction. It made the characters seem like the Marx brothers instead of starfleet officers and I felt the characters deserved better.

The writing and storytelling was not as rich and deep as I would have liked, but they needed to set the foundation and that is a hard thing to do in 2 hours.

I loved every scene with Nimoy especially the one with Quinto. It was a touching scene and probably my favorite of the movie.

I felt the ending was great and it left me feeling satisfied.

4. Ian Fee - May 6, 2009

Star Trek lays early claim to the Best Summer Movie award and is, quite simply, the most fun I’ve had at the movies in years.

Abrams has done something remarkable. He has captured the pioneering spirit and youthful passion of the 60’s sci-fi classic and blended it with modern wizardry and cutting edge moviemaking. This isn’t a reboot, this is a rebirth. This isn’t packaging up something old, only to try and sell it as something new. This is Star Trek as we have never seen it and yet, it’s still so warmly familiar.

They’re all here; Kirk, Spock and the crew of the USS Enterprise, new faces but old friends. Just as Daniel Craig slipped into Sean Connery’s Aston Martin and tuxedo so Chris Pine takes his place in William Shatner’s Captain Chair, not imitating the original James T. Kirk, but convincing us all the same, even in this first outing, that the centre seat on the Enterprise’s bridge is his. Zachary Quinto, Karl Urban and the rest inhabit their characters with care, respect but also with a much needed energy. The casting in this movie has to be noted as it is spot on and not just for the classic characters. Our villain Nero, while perhaps a bit thinly written, is played with great relish by Eric Bana, giving us a really good movie baddie and not the all too real and disturbing psychopath that most action movies give us these days.

Abrams’ long time collaborators Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci provide a script that is both epic and intimate, inventive yet reverential while Michael Giacchino’s music gives the movie a pulsating heartbeat while paying respect to Alexander Courage’s legendary theme.

All the little pieces of the puzzle, crafted with love and care, create a summer blockbuster that can easily stand toe to toe with the boy wizards, battling robots and caped crusaders recent summers have brought us. As Batman brings us darkness, James Bond brings us grittiness and Transformers brings us mayhem, Star Trek brings us the adventure, excitement and hope that was Gene Roddenberry’s original vision in 1966, which, thanks to Abrams and his new crew continues to Live Long and Prosper.

5. Ian Fee - May 6, 2009

Sorry, forgot my rating –

9/10 – only because I think the sequel will be even better!!

6. Andy - May 6, 2009

Saw the film last night at a screening in NYC. It was pretty good. I waited 4 hours in the rain to watch it and it was worth it. There are a few things that left me bothered, but if you look at it for what it is, the rebirth of Trek, then it was fantastic.

My girlfriend never really liked Star Trek. I would try to make her watch it, but she would always fall asleep. She truly enjoyed this film. It is Star Trek for non-Trekkies and it saved the franchise from death.

I can live with the new Enterprise exterior design, but the interior was killing me. The bridge didn’t feel like “home”. There was something about it that made me not want to spend anytime there. I don’t know what it is. They never even had a moment to catch their breadth. The engineering section was very dissapointing. You expect to see warp engines in engineering, not miles of pipes and tanks.

Cadet to Captain? I couldn’t do it. It just didn’t work for me. I could over look the other plot twists, but SIX ranks? and command of the flagship?

Over all it was a very good movie and it sets it up for an extraordinary sequel. I guess you have to start somewhere.

9/10.

7. Oztrek - May 6, 2009

Greg, Australia Calling

Just saw the sneak preview and came away gratified and so relieved!

I had such high expectations for this movie I was trying to mentally prepare for a let-down but… it never happened!

This is a new look but the old charm is still there.

For all you traditionalists (my hand is up) there are some emotional nods and winks such as “are you out of you vulcan mind” and the music at the end is special. I think the more trek you know, the more meaningful the movie will be, but judging by the audience reaction it is great ride anyway. (they couldn’t have all been trekkies surely!)

The special effects were brilliant. The cast was strong. Humour in the right places, heretofore unlikely & now suprising romance and plenty of action.

Nostalgia runs deep for me, but I approached this movie with an open mind & I was totally hooked… and so was the audience btw.
After only one viewing this is now my favourite Trek movie I have watched and rewatched and loved its forerunners many times over.

To Paramount, to JJ and the team… A big thank you. Trek will continue to live long & prosper – however “self-serving” that may seem ;)

8. Scott Lara - May 6, 2009

Hello Everyone…Saw the movie twice this week thanks to 2 great radio stations here in Jacksonville, Florida…99.9 Gator Country and 95.1 WAPE.

As a 47 yr old guy, (married, 2 kids), I thought the film was great. Great acting, great effects, great play between the actors. Many of the people in the theater laughed, applauded, and were happy.

For those naysayers, I would say just what William Shatner (Denny Crane) said on SNL those many years ago…”it’s just a tv show (movie)”.

If all the ST fans who are so wound up about this channeled their energy (and some do) to volunteering, picking up trash around the neighborhood, or mentored, that would be a good thing.

Seriously….give the folks a pat on the pat…not a kick in the teeth.

9. Scott Lara - May 6, 2009

On a scale of 1 to 10, I give it a 9.

10. VulcanNonibird - May 6, 2009

I just saw it: AMAZING!!!

Winona sadly only had three scenes – but two of those are so great and heartwrenching!

But the whole cast is great!

The whole movie? To quote Ezri Dax, when she first met Benjamin Sisko: “It will we like old times, except….different!”

Be sure to watch it!

As it’s already nearing midnight and I’ve to rise early tomorrow only this short.

Rating 9/10

11. Mel - May 6, 2009

The movie is great! There are some plot holes and some things are just a little too unbelievable, but all in all it is a really nice movie. :-D

The special effects are very good, but luckily it is not only about nice spectacular pictures. There are a lot of character moments, too. The actors did a very good job. I love especially Chris Pine as Kirk. He is just perfect for the role. The other actors are of course good, too.

I think the next movie will be even better. This movie was for a large part about the introduction of the characters to new Star Trek viewers. In the next film this won’t be necessary anymore.

All in all I really love this movie.

Rating 10/10

12. NCC-73515 - May 6, 2009

Preview review of German version
I read most of the reviews and all spoilers… when you read scene descriptions and how beautiful this scene is and how great that ship looks… you begin to imagine it. So I imagined several scenes that were described as beautiful, thrilling, etc. Problem is: they probably look different in the film.
I expected more. The beautiful scenes were simply too short.
Didn’t like the monsters, but that little parasite could be related to those from Conspiracy (TNG), and I liked that.
The style amazed me (space scenes), the costumes were great (the Romulans remind me of Nosferatu in their costumes and the Starfleet uniforms work perfectly).
Props… hm. Phaser is nothing special, just the typical Sci-Fi blaster. Tricorder is used once for a log entry.
Sounds: The transporter sound is basically the TOS sound with some added features. The intercom sound is a typical TOS button sound!
And you’ll even hear the traditional three-note-sound (da-deeee-dap), but not where you’d expect it! Great detail! The tribble also comes with the classic sounds.
I was disturbed by the lens flares and shaky cam when I saw the clips, but I barely noticed them in the movie. Cancel red alert!
All the scenes that made me wanna cry (positively) were over the next moment and that is the big thing I didn’t like.
There is one major canon error that is not explained by alternate timelines (Delta Vega and its connection to Vulcan).
I also didn’t like the romance in the movie.
But the good things outweigh the bad. So many nods!!!
There is even a great reference to BTTF2!
And there are scenes that remind me of the movies.
Flying to the Ship (TMP) – but too short!
An Admiral’s uniform (TMP)
The entire Apple-eating scene (WOK)
A drive malfunction (SFS)
Training (TVH)
Bump! (TFF)
Red matter in zero-G looks like Klingon blood (TUC)
And the end credits are just beautiful.
The most exciting moment was when the title was revealed. Tears all over me (almost)
There were a lot of fans in costume there and I took 18 friends with me.
People were laughing at the right moments and there was applause when Nimoy appeared – and again when the credits began!
Rating: 9/10

13. Adam - May 6, 2009

Hi everybody, Adam from Melbourne Australia here – caught the midnight IMAX screening with all the other trekkies and I have to say that after 25 years of immersing myself in Star Trek, this movie finally felt like Star Trek always should have been. It was big, funny, spectacular and nuanced – Im not saying anything more than that as it should be seen for yourself.

The only thing that let me down was the petty squabbling of the others I was there with who just couldnt seem to get their head around everything that was happening – face it guys, this is Star Trek and it is beautiful and will be here to stay (again!). JJ and the team, as a movie lover, not just a fan, thank you for one of the most spectacular cinematic experiences of my life. ***** (Thats right, 5 stars…)

14. nickers - May 6, 2009

The Enterprise coming out of the clouds on Titan…

I almost had a warp core breach!

Stunning shot.

The film was brilliant. Great acting, great dialogue.

I just cannot get my head around why there was such a need for deviation, in terms of the time line. Will this ever be explained? I hope so.

I for one was mortified at the “engine room”. It just looked like a water purification plant, not like the area where matter and antimatter come together on a starship.

So many positive things to say, that none of them come to mind now.

However, the issue of Vulcan, and the timeline deviation still bothers me. It just doesn’t “feel right”.

15. nickers - May 6, 2009

Forgot to add my score:
10 out of 10 for effects!
9 out of 10 for music!
9 out of 10 for acting!
7 out of 10 for story… It just doesn’t sit right. For me at least.

16. Kenny Maths - May 6, 2009

Just back from a midnight screening in Bonnie Scotland (Edinburgh to be precise).

This film kicks butt….in a major way. Absolutely superb with not a wasted minute of screen time.

A definite 10/10. This is certainly up there with ‘The Wrath of Kahn’….whether it is ultimately judged to be better or not will require repeat viewings and the passing of time (to give perspective)…and of course it will still come down to personal taste.

I’ve been avoiding spoilers like crazy….and I’m so glad that I did. This film was just a delight from start to finish. For those who haven’t seen it….you have a treat in store people. I’m so pleased I’m going back to see it after work later today. Woo-Hoo! :-)

Well done to JJ, Robert, Alex, the entire cast (who were great…and Simon Pegg had the Scottish accent down well!)…and in particular Leonard Nimoy. It was a joy to see him don the pointy ears one more time…and if it proves to be for the last time, he’s left the franchise in safe hands.

17. Old Fan - May 6, 2009

Hello all from Dublin, Ireland. Just back from seeing the film, and hate to say it, but can’t help but feel a massive disappointment in what I’ve just watched. I thought I was going to see a film about characters I’ve enjoyed for the last 30 years. But I was dismayed to see, with the exception of Urban and Nimoy, what may as well have been strangers on the screen. Pine reminded me more of Charlie Harper than of James Kirk. Quinto nailed the look of Spock just right, but no where near subtle enough. The smaller characters seemed only there for forced humor. I give Chekovs ridiculous attempt at entering a voice code as an example.

The one thing that I came away with was that while many people will enjoy it and with Abrams name attached to it a lot of newcomers will come to see it. I don’t think the more ardent of fans will warm to it.

5 / 10 could do much better. ( and hope the rumored sequel is )

18. Brian Roskamp - May 6, 2009

I was lucky enough to see Star Trek (2009) at a prescreening on 5/2/09 with one of the employees of STTE that moved to my area and we’ve stayed in contact with. Going into the movie we were all very excited, but it even exceeded my expectations. When this was announced I was cautious, but since then my excitement has grown and it definitely went beyond what I had imagined.

There were a few flaws: the music could be better, the story could be more solid, but overall it is an amazing movie. It has the perfect blend of sci-fi elements mixed with action, comedy and emotion. It is great for everyone, but you’ll definitely be in for a treat if you’re a long time fan.

I hope you all enjoy it as much as I did. I give it a 9.5/10

19. Matt - May 6, 2009

Just got back from 10am screening here in Brisbane Australia.

Been following this since the start and loved everything trek that has come before it and this completely blew my mind. I was definitely no disappointment.

Story was great and engaging. I can see that it was very carefully written to be accessible for a wide audience. Glad that the technobable was at an absolute minimum. I think “Gravimetric” was the babbliest word in the movie. Plenty of shout outs that only a fan could pick up on

Acting was great, the people they’ve found really fit their roles. I initially had reservations about Zoe Saldana, but I was proven wrong. Also Zach Quinto was great with a bare minimum of the “Sylar” moments that I thought would ruin his performance. Kudos on the casting

special effects were spectacular – dont listen to the nay sayers, the new Enterprise is superb, and the transporter effect is pretty sweet. All the little computer terminals with their touch screen interfaces were awesome and really fit the universe well. Ok so they look light years ahead of the 24th Century LCARS terminals, but should they remake TNG down the track no doubt its look would be upgraded to something even more spectacular!

The movie really is great, and I hope it gets the proper success it deserves, but a lot of trekkers are going to have some problems with it tho – This was more of a reboot than we’ve been lead to believe. Alternate time line or not, the scale of the changes to the time line effectively makes this a reboot in my book. I don’t really mind, but a lot of people are going to I’m sure.

I look forward to the new Star Trek Franchise!

20. Joe - May 6, 2009

Just came back from a screening in Manhattan on the IMAX screen.

As a movie in general, it works everywhere; from the dialogue and pacing, the action and effects, and the humor. There’s something there for everyone.
More importantly, I thought the movie really was for ‘us’ whether we’re willing to accept that or not.
There are enough tidbits and send-ups and interesting twists that make this a fantastic Star Trek experience. Period.
The diehards enjoyed TOS references, little kids loved Pegg and Yeltchin, and everyone watched intensely over the changing dynamics between Pine and Quinto throughout the film.
The alternative timeline stuff is totally acceptable as well; the amount of times the Star Trek universe has time traveled (from ‘Naked Time’ to ‘Voyage Home’ and then some) leaves some leeway for whatever this team wanted to do. And what they wanted to do was also successfully pulled off.
I always enjoyed the preachy stuff in TOS, TNG and especially in the complexities of DS9, but when we return to the idea of the “space western” Gene originally pitched…this is basically it. Star Trek was brainy, but it was also funny.
The most treasured part is no matter how campy you might think the “space western” is…there’s no way around getting complex and cerebral with the kind of characters that were written for this adventure.
Everyone involved should be grateful for a crew of actors, writers, and JJ, for refreshing such a treasured hallmark.

And I feel as though this is just the beginning for us.

21. Matthew Rimmer - May 6, 2009

Rating: 7.5/10

I went to see ‘Star Trek’ with as open a mind as I could muster, being a big fan of the franchise and one who likes consistency with canon. I knew things would change with an alternate timeline and was prepared for this having read that this was all explained. Quite why an alternate timeline would result in such poor taste in uniform design and messy starship interior design, I don’t know – but I did not judge the film on this, having already taken a dislike to these trivialities based on what I’d seen in trailers and publicity photos.

I loved the opening – George Kirk’s sacrifice through to the Academy scenes on Earth. It was when Chekov and Sulu came on screen sat in front of Pike with no explanation that the film began to unravel for me. Saying Chekov is 17 later on is not telling me how or why a boy is there before Kirk, even in this crazy new timeline. The whizzing round in space was all very impressive but I soon tired of constant motion on the bridge. The camera hardly ever settled on whomever was talking, it just kept shaking. There’s pacing, then there’s excessive movement – this was the latter.

Old Spock’s explanation of events via mind-meld was clunky and an unsubtle means of exposition. I was glad to have read the prequel comic as it enabled me to follow this. I’d far rather have seen that played out at the start of the film. I was less than convinced by Nero pinning such blame on Spock whom was the main person trying to prevent Romulus’s destruction. Some of the references peppering the film were welcome and I enjoyed seeing Kirk’s Kobayashi Maru test, (even though I simultaneously felt this should be an unseen moment), but I did start to resent what felt like much of the script to ‘Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan’ being quoted back – (get your own script…)

As for the characters; Chris Pine as Kirk was brilliant – just the right amount of ‘old’ Kirk mannerisms. Karl Urban as McCoy was even better, again channelling the right amount of ‘old’ McCoy, but he did seem to vanish by the end. I liked Simon Pegg as Scotty. Leonard Nimoy was dependable as ever, although I felt him underused and his Spock left somewhat adrift at the end. I did not buy into Uhura and Spock’s relationship at all – it lacked any build up, (yes, with hindsight, there were a couple of subtle hints, but they were far too subtle), felt so forced and seemed to pander to Hollywood clichés – that a romantic sub-plot is essential to success. That aside, Zachary Quinto’s glowering reminds me too much of Sylar I’m afraid, (and I’m normally good at detaching actor’s from their iconic roles), but he was probably the best choice for the role. Although she was good, I cannot quite see what seemingly everyone is raving about with regard to Zoe Saldana and her Uhura. Anton Yelchin was amusing enough as Chekov, but I’m afraid John Cho looked bored as Sulu throughout, save in combat.

So all in all, ‘Star Trek’ was OK. I had hoped for more and expected worse. Michael Giacchino’s score was suitably epic and I’m glad I ordered the soundtrack. I recognise the thought process behind it, but I maintain that the timeline did not need such drastic changing to bring in the masses. A threat from the future combined with an origin story could still have been told without the ultimate replacement of TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY’s timeline. The feeling remains it’s a slap in the face to those of us who invested in those series, like they weren’t good enough. True, they weren’t drawing the numbers, but was such drastic measure really needed? Yes, ‘Star Trek’ technically follows those events, but it and its sequels are now replacing them.

It has achieved the film-makers’ aims to bring in a new audience to ‘Star Trek’, but it’s a shame ‘Star Trek’ had to be effectively ‘fixed’ in order to do this. I went to see it with a moderate fan, a casual viewer and a non-fan – I gave it 3.5/5, the moderate fan gave it 4/5, the casual viewer 4.5/5 and whilst it may seem familiarity may breed contempt, the non-fan didn’t follow it at all, so it seems even new ‘Star Trek’ warrants some prior ‘Star Trek’ awareness. A good film, an average ‘Star Trek’ film.

22. Keith Carmichael - May 7, 2009

I went into the theater expecting the biggest let-down I have ever experienced, I was really happy with the movie! It took me a full 24 hours to figure out what caused me to dislike this movie. I think there was far too much “bloodletting” violence but the industry seems to be feeding that to everyone lately.
I was unhappy they decided to leave the traditional Star Trek music behind, It might have been the deal maker for me.
What is up with the lighting? Movie seemed very unfinished as far as quality goes. Sound was piss poor too, but that could have been the theater. Camera seemed to jump all over the place. And a simple explanation as to how they got the enterprise off the ground would have been nice.
I have recommended this movie to all my friends, I thank JJ for his work on the film. “I have not been a huge fan of his other works.” I wish I could be more excited about the future of Star Trek.
I have always believed in the series, I can’t help to feel a great let down with the fundamentals of the Federation that got lost with this move. There was just too much blood, violence, and quick aggressive reaction without due cause for me. Don’t think for a minute that I am not a card carrying member of the NRA, but Star Trek was a great hope for me that I didn’t feel this movie captured. I am sure they are not going to change this because the market has degraded to the point of lunacy for blood in the past 10 years. I just wish we could have found a way to contain this need in the professional wrestling industry and let the quality programs continue on their marry way.
I have always been to the first showing of any Trek movie to this point, and I was able to catch a sneak preview of 11. I am sorry to say I will not follow suit with the next movie, if there is one, I am just sad to see the franchise sold out this way.
By the way, this is no prequel, it is at best a complete reboot. I wish the new endeavor all the luck in the world, I am really not interested in following something so vulgar.
To the actors, if this movie had a chance of making me happy it was your fault. You have truly captured the essence of your characters. Thank you so very much for a truly spectacular performance!! I feel better knowing your filling the shoes of the original cast. I just wish I could say the same about the guys filling my screen with blood, and my ears with music that is well done but wrong.

23. Pete359 - May 7, 2009

Oh..

My..

God!

Just got out of the cinemas, am posting this from my iPhone. That was by far the best Trek I’ve seen in a long long time.

But… poor Vulcan. :(

Everything from the characters, to the story, to the effects, to the little Trek tidbits (the Katric Ark was one I wasn’t expecting but was cool none the less). Everything worked, even Chekov’s accent… it was great.

Favourite character would be Bones for sure. But really they were all great. But not enough Sulu!

Hope everyone enjoys it as much as we did! Whoo!

Star Trek FTW!

24. matty_uk - May 7, 2009

OMG I can’t belive I have finally seen it.

It was wicked.

My only niggle with it was that Nero wasn’t really a strong villan. I think his space ship was scarier than him.

The opening shot in the Imax also made me feel woozy

25. FreddyE - May 7, 2009

STAR TREK – A REVIEW OF THE GERMAN DUB

I had the pleasure to see a preview of the movie, one day before the offical german opening
day. I´ll try to keep this a spoiler free as possible.

The Dubbing

One of the important points unique to german or other non-english fans is of course:
How good is the dubbing? We all know that a bad translation or a bad choice of voice actors
can partially or totally ruin a good movie. I´m happy to say that in this case the dubbing
gets a score of 90 %. The translation seems to be spot on, gone is the overly uncouth wording we
know from TOS. The voice actors fit like a glove, the only one that needs some getting used to
is Nimoy-Spock´s. It´s apparent that they tried to find one that sounds like the old voice actor
and there is a similarity there….but the voice is much deeper than it used to be. The only other
gripe I have is that Chekov´s accent is way overdone for my taste…Chekov never had a accent
THAT strong in any of the german dubs.

Sound design:

Almost all sounds have been replaced by totally new effects, although most are reminiscent of their
TOS counterparts. The bridge sounds very similar to what it used to be like…although the usual
background beeping sounds much deeper. There are sounds that haven´t been changed at all though,
for example when Kirk presses the button for a shipwide announcement. The transporter sound effect
is the some but with an additional “electrical crackling” sound. The only sound effects that stand
out as “strange” are the weapons…especially the phasers wich sound a bit too “Star Wars” for
my taste but fit to the new visuals.

SFX:

Overall the visual effects are great and right on todays standards. The ships now move in 3D,
gone are the “submarine battles”. The phasers now look like pulse weapons, the continous beams
we are used to are gone, wich is one of the few changes that I can live with but don´t like that
much. The transporter effect has been changed radically, it seems they wanted to look it more three
dimensional with all the swirling particles…it still looks like a basic “overlay and disolve” though.

Set Design:

Overall the set design is great. The new bridge of the enterprise doesn´t look that much as if
it was designed by apple as it does on the movie stills we have seen. The ships hallways look good
but would look better with a tiny bit of color…red doors instead of grey ones would have been better.
All other sets but engeneering look great. Its much to obvious that those scenes have been filmed in
redressed factory halls. I understand that they wanted a more realistic look…but in my opinion
a chaos of tubes of different sizes is less realistic for a starship of the 23rd century instead of
more realistic.

Acting:

Not having seen the movie in english yet I can only judge the acting based on movement and facial
expressions. Everyone does a great job.

Music:

The music is perfect. It´s even more symphonic that in any other movie. Musical variations of parts
of the TOS theme music are appearing here and there, and the full new version of the theme playing thru
the end credits actually had me teary eyed.

Plot:

Overall the plot is thight and without a single boring minute, including great battle scenes and superb
emotional parts and character development. Two direct references to Warth of Kahn (dialog and visuals)
appear in the movie…although one of those two scenes has a small factual error:

[Spoiler Warning]

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E

Nero calls the ceti eel he uses on Pike a “centaurian slug” (this could be a dubbing error).
The creature he uses is an adult (wich looks exactly like in Star Trek II) instead of the young
Kahn uses and enters the victim thru the mouth instead of the ear.

E
N
D
S
P
O
I
L
E
R

[/Spoiler]

Conclusion:

This movie exceeded all my expetations. Star Trek Lives!
10 of 10

26. Al - May 7, 2009

Not bad. A bit too quick and dare I say illogical (coincidence piled on coincidence).

Chief like – the new warp effect

Chief hate – the Engine Room is AWFUL

27. DIGINON - May 7, 2009

Saw it last night. I may have to see it again to fully form an opinion as it was a lot to take in.
Let me begin this by saying that I’m more a fan of the TNG/DS9 era and as such not as versed in the details of TOS.
I liked the “early lives” stuff. To some TOS fans it may be sacrilege but I enjoyed it. I also had no problems with the crew coming together (what someone above called coincidence after coincidence).

The acting from the main players was really good. Scotty and Chekov were obviously played for laughs. Over all the humor worked. There were a lot of laughs from the audience. Maybe Chekov’s accent was a little overdone (I don’t know Walter’s accent from TOS since I’ve only seen a dubbed version of TOS on TV, but I don’t remember it as strong from the movies).

Visually, it’s absolutely stunning. The VFX work is great, no comparison really to the older movies. Sometimes, the space shots were a little too busy or too fast for my taste. But there were some beauty shots in there that really benefit from a gigantic screen :-)

May contain SPOILERS:
What I didn’t like so much: The Nero plot felt kind of “been there done that” standard movie villain stuff. Another bad guy going after Earth (okay, he didn’t go after Earth, first). I have read the Countdown comics which gives a little more background for his motivation but except for the visual spectacle this part of the movie fell flat for me.
This was also the main complaint from the 2 people I went with (to make matters worse, they haven’t read Countdown).

I think I was also a little uncomfortable with the Spock-Uhura interaction. The thing is that there wasn’t really any setup. I mean I had read about this in interviews beforehand but when the scene in the turbolift came up my friend (who doesn’t read any Star Trek websites) just went “WTF???”
Maybe it just needs some getting used to.

On the other hand, I didn’t have any problems with the engineering sets. Granted, if they decide to show more of engineering in future films, I hope they will build something from scratch or do more re-dressing of existing locations, but for this movie it worked for me (let’s be honest: we didn’t really see much of engineering).
I also had no problems with “Kirk rising through the ranks” as fast as he did. We all wanted him to end up in that chair as captain of the ship. He did a good job leading the team. I guess I’m not thinking about it as a military career but just as a journey to “his place” in that chair.

And the final scene is a perfect setup for future movies with the crew we know from TOS in place right where they belong.

28. DIGINON - May 7, 2009

P.S.: I can’t really give the movie a numerical rating (like on a scale of 1 to 10/10).
The interaction between our heroes was good to great (except for the Spock/Uhura relationship, I guess).
I just hope that if they decide to go for yet another bad guy in the next movie they take more time to flesh him out more.

29. Beyond Risa - May 7, 2009

First off, without any doubt, I am impressed with the movie. I was very happy to see Star Trek get the quality canvass it has deserved since the first conversation about taking the series to the big screen.
While it’s pointless for me to go on about the effects, or the characters or the story in any detail, I will say this – all wonderful!
My ONLY problem was this movie’s seeming effort to make Star Trek less Star Trek for the masses. It’s all well and good making a film more open to other audiences but I think in doing so here they have made a movie that could easily have been any genre, format or cast with minimal changes.
One final note struck me watching this – has there really only been five or six people doing all the work on the Enterprise all these years? There didn’t seem to be much of a crew and those we saw didn’t seem to important.
I was very impressed with this movie and anxious for more. My nitpicks are just that and far less important than the event itself.
It was a shame that the hand phasers didn’t have that familiar sound though :(
Well done team – you’ll get the hang of it eventually!

30. Nemesis4909 - May 7, 2009

Saw it today, advance preview in Falkirk- Scotland.

How about that I saw Star Trek in The KIRK

First of all I loved it, it was absolutely superb from start to finish. Everything worked so well.

The opening sequence of the Kelvin being attacked was mindblowing, that’s a tough little ship and Robau’s short screen time was effective, he’s such a good character. The whole scene was very harrowing as well, really met with a great emotional resonance. I honestly felt tears welling up during the sequence.

I feel that the scene with young Kirk in the car was slightly pointless, his character would have been established fine in the bar scene.

The young Spock stuff was very well done and the actor playing Sarek was fine, though not a patch on Mark Lenard but he’s a supporting actor so not too big a deal.

The way McCoy was introduced was excellent, nice revelation of his nickname’s genesis and Urban had nailed it in the first few seconds. Throughout the film he was superb, the best of the cast I’d say but i’m biased and always loved McCoy.

Zachary Quinto’s Spock was fantastic, no comparison to Sylar was made in my head and he towed the line that the character did very well.

Chris Pine’s Kirk was amazing. He embodied what the character needed to be in every single way. You could see that he was destined for greatness and the youthful arrogance that he had was portrayed very well.

Zoe Saldana’s Uhura was very good, she did a good job of the character and came across as being more strong willed that the original ever did, as for her relationship with Spock I didn’t have a problem with that, the two characters were often very flirtateous shown by when she sang to him and discussions about the moon.

Anton Yelchin’s Checkov was very well done, a fine homage to Koenig’s portrayal and in some cases a better one, his accent was better and his comic timing was superb.

Simon Pegg’s Scotty was fantastic. I had my reservations about the casting but was proven wrong, his accent was excellent and he came across as being an eccentric genius which was perfect. I also loved his sidekick.

John Cho’s Sulu was fine, most of his screentime was action so there isn’t a lot to say about him in terms of characterisation but he was good enough.

Bruce Greenwood as Christopher Pike was brilliant, he was such a good character and the homage to his chair was amusing. He came across as a capable and fair commander as well as being a bit of a father figure to Kirk.

Eric Bana as Nero was good, as a villain I felt that he wasn’t as good as he could have been. He was certainly no Khan but maybe in the same league as Chang which is by no means an insult. It really came across that he was a miner completely out of his league.

Leonard Nimoy…he’s Leonard Nimoy what else can I say about him? It was great to see him wear the ears one more time and it’s nice that he could return.

The design aesthetic was great. I loved the bridge of the Enterprise and Kelvin, everything seemed so functional. The industrial design of the engineering section was a good choice since it appeared that it was where the work was done. The shuttlebays being packed with shuttles were a nice touch.

The design of the Enterprise was excellent, I take back every bad thing i said about it, in this movie it was awesome and the weapon effects were well done as was the Warp effect, looked very aggresive.

I liked how the transporters seemed difficult to use and positted some new and unique problems that have never been seen before.

The Narada was an interesting design, it seemed really mysterious and menacing and the interior was a bit of a house of horrors.

The plot was fast paced and exciting, everything had to be paid close attention to and the set pieces were fantastic, particularly the destruction of Vulcan. That moment showed that this version of events isn’t afraid to take risks and that anything can happen, the stakes were definitely raised and I look forward to seeing more.

The friendship between Kirk and Spock was well done, it was believable how this came about.

I was disappointed when it ended because I felt like it was just getting started, seeing the crew set up for new adventures was excellent. I can’t wait for the next installment.

Nimoy’s recital of the famous speech was very moving, I almost cried. It was great to hear it.

As for the alternate reality thing, I love it. It totally works and it allows the crew to be on new and interesting missions that we cannot predict, that’ll be great to see.

There’s so much potential to come from this film and I loved it.

First impression is 9/10.

31. SupremeDalekOnTheBridge - May 7, 2009

I’ll keep this brief.

Abrams has assembled a fine cast, and a true worthy edition to the Star Trek Pantheon. Simon Pegg, for me personally, wa s abit of a damp squib. By the time Scotty appears, the film is building twoards it’s climax, and I felt he was shoehorned in, even moreso then Original Spock. Eric Bana is suitibly menacing, but alas, is rather wasted, and I suspect will become a forgotten villian. I was surprised that I enjoyed Yelchin’s Chekov so much, but I must congratulate Karl Urban as a classic scene stealer. Cast = 8

Effects were stellar, besides the Ice Planet (I know what’s called, but no spoilers!) monsters. Effects = 9

Music, while great typical Michale Giachhino work, lacks that spark of Trek, while charcters have themes ie Kirk, Spock… the themes need to be more fleshed out for the next instalment. Music = 7

Set Design; excellent work, and this Enterprise interior is starting to grow on me. Even the big nacelles are! But the bowels of Kelvin and Enterprise (filmed in factories I believe) is not very convincing in the 23rd Century. Set Design = 8

I must admit a tidbit, when we first see Bones on the shuttle, the projector broke at my cinema! After various false starts, and after the manager said he would rewind the film a few minutes for us, it started again. Except he went forward a few minutes instead! So we see about ten seconds of Nero and Ayel on Narada, and then into the Kobayashi Maru test! So I have a perfect excuse to go again to see what I missed!

Overall, the best Star Trek movie since First Contact. Which you also did’nt need not have any prior Trek expierence to enjoy the ride. Overall, I’ll give it an eight out of ten. But I still have to see that minute I missed, so I’ll get back to you!

Star Trek Lives!

32. SupremeDalekOnTheBridge - May 7, 2009

Damn! I forgot to mention Leonard Nimoy!

I was slightly disappointed with him. I felt as if he was thrown in for fun. Nice to see Leonard Nimoy in action once again, but….

I dunno. Something was missing.

33. Dom - May 7, 2009

MAJOR SPOILERS FOLLOW!

I remember reading about JJ Abrams’ new Star Trek film when it was first announced three years ago. In that time, I’ve seen relatives die, gambled on quitting a job that I felt was going nowhere, moved to a new city, started a new life. The new Star Trek is the thing that’s lurked in the background the whole time everything else has happened. It’s almost fitting to find myself visiting my parents in my old home town and going to see the film with them.

I was vocally in favour of this film from the outset. I never gelled with The Next Generation and the other spin-offs. I felt that those series reflected a change of view by Star Trek’s creator in later life and was essentially a completely different series that bolted some Star Trek iconography on to get sold.

When they announced the return of the original Star Trek characters on the original starship Enterprise, I felt vindicated for standing up for TOS when everyone else seemed to be dismissing it in favour of its spin-off. Of course we were going to get a new cast, but my love for the original characters, meant that I was more than willing to accept them.

I’ve had rows galore and fun discussions galore with people on this site, and have been accused of being a Trek hater (how dare I look forward to this traitorous new film!) a TOS-only fan, a TNG-hater (I’m not: I think it’s good TV, while not necessarily good Star Trek) even someone who would better off being a fan of something else, like Stargate!!! :0

It perhaps shows how broad Trek has become that we all have such different expectations of a new Star Trek movie. Indeed, it’s now possible to be a Star Trek fan, yet dislike vast tracts of it.

So, after being so vocal standing up for this film, not only did it need to be good from an enjoyment point of view, but it needed to be good because I didn’t want to feel like an idiot for standing up for this film for three years (yes, I know that’s vain!)

I’m pleased to report that the film comfortably lived up to my expectations, although one or two issues stand out for me with the pacing here and there.

The performances were bang-on. Chris Pine made Jim Kirk his own, while in some way echoing the Great One. Zachary Quinto was . . . fascinating. His Spock, naturally enough, echoed Leonard Nimoy’s Spock, but the loss of Vulcan and his acceptance of Earth as his ‘other’ home perhaps points to a different slant to his future performances.

Karl Urban just was Leonard McCoy. If I’d have closed my eyes, I’d have believed I was listening to Deforest Kelley. At the same time, there’s a tougher, more badass quality to this version of Bones that I can’t wait to see explored in greater depth. Zoe Saldana was fabulous as Uhura (what’s her first name again?) given a tougher edge and a more prominent role than the Nichelle Nichols. It’s no reflection on Nichelle to say that I prefer this new Uhura: a role with a depth I’m sure Nichelle Nichols would have loved to tackle had she been given the chance in the 1960s.

John Cho was an excellent Sulu showing Takei’s version’s warmth mixed with a youthful enthusiasm. I liked the fact that he’d unexpectedly found himself at the helm. Anton Yechin as Chekov perhaps over-egged the pudding a touch with his character’s presence, but was fun nevertheless.

Simon Pegg gave a showstealing performance in his scenes as Scotty. Actually even cooler than Scotty was his pet mutant lizard thingy! I want to see more of that character! Get down from there!!

Among the others, I’m so glad they’ve kept Bruce Greenwood’s Pike around as he had such gravitas and brought a level-headed maturity desperately needed in loud action film such as this this. I hope he’ll be around for the sequels.

Ben Cross was an admirable Sarek. Indeed, Sarek’s admission of his love for Amanda and Winona Ryder’s (too) brief appearance in that role add a whole new dimension to two wonderful characters. This is why it’s so great to recast roles: new actors can’t fail to bring something different to the characters. And, of course, Leonard Nimoy was wonderful in his small role. My only regret with his appearance is that he didn’t get to meet Sarek onscreen, given his admission in TNG that he never got to mindmeld with his father. That would have been an amazing scene: the father meeting an older version of his own son.

Rachel Nichols appearance as an Orion was hysterical. I love the fact that, in spite of her presence at the academy, she still has an Orion’s overactive sex drive. Shame about the red lipstick: I’d have preferred dark green!

As for the plot: complex, but generally nicely handled, given the sheer number of boxes to tick. There was a lot to take in and the only serious weakness was the infodump . . . I mean mindmeld. There also were the obvious removed Klingon sequences and Winona Ryder scenes which positively scream for an extended edition.

And, my word! Amanda Grayson dying along with Vulcan! We’d known Vulcan was likely to buy the farm, but I didn’t anticipate Amanda Grayson’s death. It gave the scale of Vulcan’s destruction an added depth. On top of that, Spock and Kirk have both lost a parent to Nero, increasing their brotherly bond.

In spite of Roberto Orci’s assurances that the original universe still exists, there’s no evidence of that in the new film. And, indeed, the destruction of the Narada ensures a reset switch is impossible. What’s cool about that from this TOS fan’s point of view is that the TOS characters get to experience all those great adventures all over again. And perhaps, even with the timeline slowly rebuilding itself, we’ll end up with less smug, less dictatorial Federation by the 24th Century and hopefully one where Jim Kirk won’t die as a result of a brush with some dorky space tinsel!

It has to be said, it was glaringly obvious that there were subplots missing from the film in a couple of places: Nero’s unexplained hiding out for 23 years, the sudden revelation of young Spock’s and Uhura’s romance and that there was too little of Spock’s mother for her death to have the resonance it should have had. I understand that the film needed to fit within a certain slot for cinema screenings, but the Klingon scenes and Amanda Grayson scenes are ones I’d like to see added into an extended DVD/Blu-ray release. And any additional Rachel Nichols material is gladly accepted! ;)

Visually, the film was very impressive. JJ Abrams’ and his team’s sensibility is very different from that of past Trek film and TV directors, giving this film a bang-up-to-date feel while reintroducing the staple elements we expect of Star Trek. I’m glad we’re shot of the standard images of the Enterprise and can have a mobile camera, reminding us that there is no up or down in space. Clearly TNG writer Ron Moore’s Battlestar Galactica had an impact on the look of the movie. I like that it used a lot of handheld material and the oft-mentioned light flares. The warp speed effects are the best yet. They’re very simple, yet pack a punch. And anything is better than the rubbish warp effect used in TMP and badly adapted for the 80s-2000 TV Treks.

Designwise, the film beautifully blends old and new. Costume design is a great blend of modern fabrics and William Ware Theiss’s original uniforms. Obviously a good deal more detail is required for a cinema film, and the textures of the fabric pop out. It’s also nice to see the core costumes designs that all future Treks have referenced.

Shipwise, I liked the Kelvin and thought the new Enterprise was great. Actually, I really liked the engine room, believing that pipes, steam, grease and oiled joints will always be part of engineering. I also loved the lighting in the engine room. The bridge was nothing like as white as some stills implied. I felt completely at home with it.

The Narada was wonderfully alien, but, stripped of the material about the Klingons, one can’t understand why Nero didn’t trash large swathes of the Federation and Klingon Empire while waiting for Spock to come of age. Love the Red Matter. Who supplied it? SD-6?

Musically, the film was outstanding. I was never a great fan of Jerry Goldsmith’s themes – too pompous – but Michael Giacchino has blended something of the quirkiness of the 1960s scores with the grandiose aspects of Goldsmith’s themes. I’ll certainly pick up this album.

So, ultimately, I had a blast watching this film. I’ve never much cared to know how these characters met, but am glad to see an origin story created to introduce the new cast. Whether or not TOS and beyond has been rebooted or rewritten, whether or not it was erased or not, I don’t care. The characters we care about still exist and are going to experience all these great adventures all over again. And that means for disgruntled TNG fans that their characters might also exist in some way again.

Unfortunately, my one serious gripe with this film, leaving a bad taste in mouth at the end was the small but significant use of ‘where no one has gone before’ instead of ‘where no man has gone before.’ I thought we were beyond all that politically correct cr@p!

However, today, I watched Star Trek’s death and rebirth. I can understand Leonard Nimoy saying Star Trek can’t go back to TV after this: the bar has been raised far too high now. this is the sort of film I wanted when I sat down to watch TMP on VHS in 1984. I’m very much looking forward to the sequel to this film. In the interim, I’d love to see an animated series.

I also look forward to some books set in this new period, particularly with Nimoy’s Spock living in this strange ‘hall of mirrors’ version of his own past. What could be more fascinating, yet disturbing?

A great end to three years’ build-up. Thank you JJ Abrams, Leonard Nimoy, Damon Lindelof, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman for giving me back the Star Trek I grew up loving.

This film is a shiny new version of your father’s Star Trek. But it’s certainly not your older brother’s Star Trek!

34. Ada - May 7, 2009

This new Star Trek, JJ Abrams Star Trek, Is many things: It is a Si-Fi film, It is a Drama Film, It is an Action Film, It is a Character Driven Film, but, most of all, it is Phenomenal and the greatest thing of all, it is Phenomenal while true to being Star Trek, yes it has Green Woman, Yes it has a random guy wearing a red shirt sent down to a planet with the main characters who bites the dust, it has the great verbal wars between “Bones” and Spock and most of all, it stays true the the message of hope Star Trek gives.

The film begins with one of the most epic Space Battles you’ll see in a while, which is not only epic action wise, but also drama wise and emotionally. The plot is pretty thin but this is made up for by the extraordinary Script, acting, Special Effects and the magical score of the film.

Okay, so let me begin with the acting, almost every character nails it, Pine absolutely nail it, he is Kirk, from the mannerism (except for the strange way of talking that Shanter had, thankfully), to the emotions he shows, to the way he is just willing to throw himself of a 20,000m platform hanging in mid air to save one of this comrades, he absolutely nails it (and yes, he also nail a green Ailen girl).

Then there Spock, Quinto’s Spock is a bit different, more emotional and more, well, un-logical (though he tries to seem logical most of the time), but he still bring his A game in probably the greatest performance of his life. For those who don’t know, the Original Spock is also in this film, so I thought Quinto might have shrunk while facing his predecessor on screen, his doesn’t and makes a iconic character his and owns it.

Then there Uhura and the rest: Scotty, Sulu, Chekhov, and “Bone” McCoy. Uhura, played by Zoe Saldana, is portrayed, once again, amazingly. She nails the rule and makes it her own (and has an unforeseen Love Plot along the way-no not with Kirk). John Cho as Sulu, this Sulu is more action originate than the last, his Fencing skills involve more acrobatics and his is fantastic, In this film he is portrayed like never before, fantastically by Cho. Chekhov is played by an actual Russian this time, by Antony Yelchin (who is to play Kyle Reese in the new Terminator Movie) and he is hilarious, with the hilarious accent the computer can’t seem to understand and despite this he manages to save Kirk and the Crew (yes he does) Twice, Yelchin to did a great job portraying him.

Now we come to Scotty, the miracle worker. Who else could you pick to portray a comical Genius engineer who is known for saving the ship ass more than once. Why an comical genius actor who is know for stealing pretty much every scene he is in. Simon Pegg plays Scotty for perfection, even stealing the scenes he doesn’t speak in and when he does speak, he will put a smile on you face and ask the big question (“So they have Sandwiches in the future?” or “Can I get a towel?”) and then he goes to describe this film perfectly (after a great moment of tention between Spock and Kirk) “Well, I like this Ship, I reckon it exciting. Oh and he nails the Scottish accent.

Okay, so I said almost everyone nailed the original character and actor, almost. After all this there’s Karl Urban, no he doesn’t nail Deforest Kelly’s amazing portrayal of the iconic Leonard “Bones” McCoy. Now, he freakin channels Deforest Kelly’s spirit in to the greatest performance of this film. Urban is as phenomenal as the film, getting everything from McCoy’s speech style, to mannerism, to emotion, to the the way he speaks and acts, to his personality and his relationship with Spock and Krin, to his technophobia sport freakin on. He is breathtaking and both him and Pegg will definitely be fan favorites (oh and for those who don’t now, McCoy and Kirk’s relationship is known to be the second greatest Bromance of fiction history, right after Spock and Kirk. and this begins wit the words, “I might throw up and you”).

Oh, wait I got to add in two more character as well: Bruce Greenwood portrayal of Pike, the father figure to Kirk after Kirk’s father died. Well, he is simply inspirational in the role and I’m set to see him in the squeal.

And that second character, why of course the Star Ship Enterprise, she is beautiful, breath taking and during those action scenes she’ll tear you apart.

Now moving on to the Score, by Michael Giacchino, is as breath taking as the film. The score bring such emotions to the film, you’ll be hard pressed not to love it. The music is just beautiful and it will eave you wanting more, it is simply to stunning to say in words.

Now moving onto the Special Effects. Okay how many time have you gone to a Cinema and said, yeah, these Special Effects are really good. Well you won’t say that with this film, for two reason, one the EFX’s aren’t that good and two, they will take the breath out of you. the EFX’s in this film are beyond Special, they are, well sitting there, I felt like I was looking through glass, they are simply wow worthy, this is something that will engrosses you in the very first seconds and not leave unit the film ends.

Well I guesses that’s all I can say right now, I saw it last night and my mind is still blown away. It was that great, despite the fact that a thin plot might lower it down a bit, it is still Phenomenal. And thus I am debating between giving it a pefect 10 or 9 and a half. Either way, you choose that for me.

Before I go, I’ll say one thing, this is so much more in Imax, In Imax it is amazing. If you are a Si-Fi fan, an action fan, an EFX’s fan, a Drama fan, a Trekkie or a Trek fan, Or in general a devoted Film goer, see this in Imax. Because it will blow you away.

So with that in mind I say good by and can’t wait to see it again (yes I will be going back several times).

Oh and again one last thing. This new Trek is cool, it is for everyone and it is cool. So yeah I got to go and get a T-Shirt saying “I was a fan of Star Trek before it was cool” to you know, not to seem like a poser…. okay, I just want another T-Shirt of Star Trek.

35. Dom - May 7, 2009

Oh and I wonder if we’ll get a Shatnerverse novel where Kirk and McCoy travel back in time arriving shortly after Nimoy’s Spock and go to live with him on Vulcan colony!

36. Ben - May 7, 2009

I’ve always been a bigger fan of the original series than some of the later attempts in the franchise, so when I heard they were taking Trek back to where it all started I was simultaneously excited and mortified. Finally I’d get to see my favourite era of Trek on the big screen (the classic crew films were great but I’ve always wanted to see the original five year mission given the treatment it deserves).

One of my biggest concerns was how they were going to translate something that, due to the effects budget and capabilities of the 60’s, largely relied on the imagination of the viewer to fill in the gaps. On top of that, I was worried that the film would now be nothing more than an effects laden vehicle for paramount to try and make some loose change from a dying franchise (and I apologise to the die hard fans for saying this but it had been dying for a long, LONG time).

I always felt that because the original series couldn’t rely on fancy effects, the story telling and character acting shone through as the strong points. As camp is it might have gotten (a by product of the 60’s more than anything) it was still some of the best adventure/action/drama I’ve ever seen.

So with excitement and trepidation (but MUCH more excitement) I sat down to watch the new take on one of my most cherished childhood memories…

WOW

If I had to try and find a flaw in this film I’d have to say it was the set for engineering, but to be honest it’s only because we’ve all gotten used to what an engine room looks like on a starship. Some one else is playing this game now and if they want their engine room to look more like that of a 20th century sea ship then it’s up to them. I’m sure I’ll get used to it, but there really wasn’t much there that made it stand out as an advanced, futuristic power source for a faster than light ship… Not that I noticed this time anyway (I’ll take a closer look when I watch the film again tomorrow.) Again, it just comes down to peoples pre-conceptions of engineering should look like, but it may take some getting used to.

Besides that, the only other problem (though it’s not really an actual error so to speak) is that the film just doesn’t seem long enough! Not just from the point of view of “it’s so great I don’t want it to end” but it does sometimes feel that we’ve missed some scenes out that would clarify some decisions characters make. Pikes choice for first officer whilst he’s off the ship, for example, seems a bit out of the blue given the circumstances and whilst it would seem obvious given the character selected based on what we know about them from the past, we haven’t really seen much in this film to justify it. i think that people that are totally new to the original crew might be somewhat surprised at the choice as a result. I’d love the film to be maybe 20-30 minutes longer to fill in some of these gaps… And just so I can have that much more fun watching it!

One of the things that really stood out in the film was the boldness the writers took in making it clear just how much this alternate timeline can and will differ from the original. Two of the key plot points literally had my jaw drop in shock and I was thinking to myself “you can’t do that!” But of course they can, and to some degree they MUST. If this new timeline followed the original line for line then there would be no suspense. In doing what they’ve done, the writers have really demonstrated that we don’t know what’s coming anymore. Anything can happen now and once the initial shock had passed I realised just how utterly amazing that is.

When it comes to the acting, as far as I’m concerned, everyone was spot on. It took a moment to get used to Zachery Quinto as Spock instead of Sylar, but it doesn’t take long. Absaloute stand out performances come from Karl Urban’s McCoy. He was perfect, and there were points where he was talking off screen and it sounded like DeForest Kelly was delivering the lines. Perhaps it was just nostalgia clouding my view (McCoy was always my favourite character) but I can’t wait for the next film and another performance of the role.

Zoe Saldana also stood out and she really made an impact with her Uhura. An annoying trend in Hollywood these days is to make “strong indipendent females” basically act as bitchy, arrogant and rude people who are just very unlikeable. Saldana made an Uhura that mirrored the original but at the same time added so much more depth and strength to the character.

All the actors were amazing though again I just wish we had more scenes with all of them so we could see them all shine so much more.

I think the crowning moment of the film though was as it drew to a close with a flyby of the new Enterprise (not quite as faithful as I would’ve personally liked it but still a beautiful ship once you see it in action) and the credits roll to the updated version of the original theme. To have the theme blasting out of a cinema sound system with a full orchestra and choir left me grinning ear to ear for a full hour after I left the screen. All the music is fantastic and very atmospheric throughout, but the original theme on that scale was just magnificent!

I can’t wait for the next film. Hell, I can’t wait to see this film again. They got it right. It might shock some of the hardcore fans in places, but to be honest I think that’s something that Star Trek has needed for a while. A big thanks to everyone involved for making such an awesome film and, on a more personal level, for creating something that DOESN’T leave me reminiscing about the old days when there wasn’t a new Kirk.

37. shane - May 7, 2009

naysayers be damned… this is star trek… pure and simple and @#+%$£* awsome!!!

38. The Noble Robot - May 7, 2009

(I wrote this for Trekweb.com last week after seeing a private preview screening, so some of the non-spoiler details will seem old hat by now)

Okay, here I go… from my perspective as a fan, and from my background as a filmmaker.

I do have some issues with the film, and I’ll lay them out here, but while I went in expecting to just like it, I came out… loving it. ZOMGBBQSAUCE, I loved it.

To start, this movie *is* Star Trek. It’s not a Star Wars-fied version of Trek, and it’s not some tarted-up Gen-Y version of Star Trek. This. Movie. Is. Star. Trek. Plain and simple.

The characters are action heroes, yes, but more then that, they’re not just the good guys, they’re the *smart* guys, and they represent the best and brightest of Starfleet. They take enormous risks, but aren’t gung-ho for the sake of it, and they don’t mug for the camera. This is, 100%, Gene Roddenberry’s 23rd century human race. Still conflicted but never paralyzed with ambiguity, still combative but never judgmental, still personally motivated but never selfish. The characters in this film work toward a common goal not because of their oath or duty or even loyalty. Although they have those things, the characters in this film are motivated to do their best, merely by default, because that’s what humans (and Vulcans) do.

Second, while the strained time-travel plotline is total preposterous nonsense, we should all thank the Lords of Kobel (that’s from Star Trek, right?) that they bent over backwards to make it happen they way they did. This is the one aspect of the film which, while not exactly exceeding my exceptions (really, from a plot perspective, it doesn’t hold up to much inspection), took me completely by surprise in how well it fit in thematically with the rest of the film.

The recent quotes from the writers about how they avoided a complete reboot because they didn’t want to “redefine the core elements,” or change the characters, sounded like bull to me. The “non-reboot reboot” was as much about not angering the fanbase while having it both ways as it was about anything else, we all suspect that, but the thing is… this other reason makes perfect honest sense to me now, and even if it wasn’t the prime motivation, it actually is a great reason to do what they did.

All the characters have pretty much the same background and “timeline” as in TOS, leading up to the events of the film. The only notable difference is Kirk, who as we all know by now (this isn’t a spoiler), has lead a completely different life due to his father’s early death. I’m still a bit bothered by this because Kirk is played as a bit of a stereotype “bad boy” in the first act, but in the end, he becomes the same character, so it works from either angle.

To be clear here, Kirk-as-James-Dean still seems a bit of a dumb move to me, mostly because the whole thing is really just an excuse to get no one to trust him until he proves himself to be a natural leader later in the film. It’s the only part of the film that really feels hackneyed and cookie-cutter.

That oft-seen sequence where “kid Kirk” nearly flies off a cliff? Pointless. There are plenty of scenes of “pre-academy” Kirk which show the same thing more effectively. Spock has a similar “child” sequence before his “pre-academy” scenes, so perhaps it was for parallel structure, but it was, IMO, put there mostly for the trailer.

In fact, these early scenes, as previously reported, contain not only the use of a Beastie Boys song, but product placement for Nokia, in both visual and audio form (think about it, you’ll figure it out). That’s right, a cell phone product placement. I love this movie, but I don’t care how much money the Finns gave Paramount, and I don’t care that Nokia and Budweiser (oh yeah, didn’t I mention that? Get ready for the “trying to sound natural” combination of “Cardassian Ale and Budweiser Classic”) might both very well exist 250 years from now… that’s not the point. This kind of blatant product placement is inexcusable, and represents what is destroying modern film. Seeing it makes my heart ache. I can easily forgive it in a movie set in modern times, but in something like Star Trek, it ends up as so transparent that it’s offensive (to my filmmaker side that is, not really my Trek fan side).

Okay, back on track… so, things start out the same, but, without spoiling things, let me tell you, the events of the film not only establish an “alternate timeline,” they diverge incredibly from the Star Trek universe that we all know. It’s not just that, say, 80 years later a “nouveau TNG” might be different, it’s that the shape of the universe is so different that there’s no reason to think that it would come to exist at all. This is probably what frightened the producers so much about doing a not-quite-reboot, and so this “alternate” point is driven home in some really awkward dialog in the film itself. “Remember, loyal trekkies, it’s an *alternate* reality, not a *replacement* reality!”

But this brings up a point about the film that not really a criticism, but makes talking about it as a fan a little odd. While we see how Chris Pine’s Jim Kirk beat the “Maru” in this film, we don’t actually see how “Kirk Prime” beat it. For all we know he used a differnt technique, but we know that least that the scene would have been very different.

This film depicts how the origin of the TOS crew, but actually, this is the story about how the new “alternate reality” crew came together. This is made explicit in the film many times. It’s not a problem, but it’s one of the many peculiarities brought up by the film’s decision to almost-but-not-quite reboot.

In truth, the transparent and repeated attempt to explain that this is only a pseudo-reboot within the film itself is, in my opinion, completely unnecessary. This is partly because, c’mon, we’re not idiots, but mostly, simply because the film is really, really, good. The plot explanation is tortured, lampshaded, and incredibly thin, but somehow… that just doesn’t matter.

In fact, every single issue I have with the film, including the ones I’ve yet to mention, are, let’s just say, 85-90% mitigated by what is good (and great) about the film.

To start, this is a two hour film that not only goes by quick but “ends on time.” There is very little fat in the film, and the pacing is so incredibly fast and well-constructed that you can barely stand to blink let alone head to the bathroom. It’s a pace that is brisk without being schizophrenic. Almost no scene is without a vital plot point, or character moment that improves your appreciation of the film as a whole. Seriously, don’t take the chance, skip that large soda.

The main flipside to this is that the few examples of “fat” that are there stand out like a sore thumb, to the point where they feel like they’re from another movie. The good news is that there are the only two that I can remember off hand: First, the “big red” snow monster sequence. It’s actually not very long, but it’s an utter, pathetic even, waste of time. In fact, if it weren’t as short as it is, and only if that, I’d would advise going to the bathroom when the sequence starts. Frankly, the movie would be better off without it.

The other example involves a bit of “Honey I Shrunk the Kids” style physical humor with Kirk and Scotty, which involves a not-so-much-humorous-as-frighteningly-life-threatening trip though a “Rube Goldberg/Matt Groening” style mechanism, and trust me, it’s not just inappropriate for this kind of film, it’s not even funny. Other silly and/or irreverent gags work well, really well, but this is just sad, and should have been cut.

Speaking of humor, this film is very, very funny. I had close to no faith in the abilities of the writers who gave us “Transformers” to deliver witty, subtle dialog and well-constructed gags, but God help me, they did. Many of the jokes (aside from the exception noted above) are very “Star Trek,” and not only that, they’re the kind of gags that don’t just make you laugh, they make you smile. That’s a big deal, and it completely blew away my expectations. There are some clunkers, and like all of the minor trip-ups in the film, they stand out against the good stuff, but this was one area I really expected to judge more harshly.

The other possible downside to the snappy pace of the film is that the “academy-to-command” timeline is eye-rolling at best, insulting to our intelligence at worst. At various points in the film, it’s alluded that academy members already hold officer rank, but are still sometimes called “cadet,” and Kirk and Spock are seen in parallel “growing up” scenes, but they’re not depicted as attending classes together… yet they appear in scenes set in the academy together. It sorta makes some sense if you put all the pieces together, but the film seems to want to suggest to the casual audience that Kirk and Spock are about the same age, but gives the details to the fans that allows the film to hold true to what we know of their ages and history. You’ll know what I’m talking about when you see the film.

On top of this, the random series of promotions and shifting “acting captain” nonsense is ridiculous, and how it all ends up is just… stupid. I’m trying to avoid spoilers, so I’ll just say that when you think about Kirk’s status at the end of the film, compare that to how Kirk (and McCoy) schemed himself on to the Enterprise in the first place.

If I had a time machine and had the chance to make one recommendation to the writers that they had to follow, I would have replaced most of “the academy” stuff with Kirk’s first starship assignment, and I’d have started him out as a lieutenant in the second act, not a cadet. All of the story points and “growing up” scenes (and some of the academy stuff) could actually have been kept as is, but it might have been a better story if Kirk’s reputation as a scoundrel was gained from working with fellow officers on a starship instead of just goofing off at the academy. His initial animosity with Spock would have to come together differently plotwise, but I don’t have all the answers here. :-)

Despite the fears of some that this would be “Star Trek: The Teenage Years,” this simply isn’t the case. Other than “boy genius” Pavel Chekov, the characters are full adults and, by majority, full officers by the time the film gets rolling. This makes the focus on the Academy especially confusing, and invites a comparison that doesn’t benefit the film. The more I think about it, the less it makes sense.

Of course, the one thing that we get to see that’s worthwhile (and maybe the reason for the whole Academy setting in the first place) is how Kirk beat the famous “no-win” scenario (sorta, see above). This is a funny scene, and the twist at the end when you find out about the test’s origins is good, but I want to avoid a big let down by hinting that the “solution” isn’t really very clever from a storytelling point of view (in fact, it’s boring). But again, this is a perfect example where the film is running on all cylinders and working so well that it’s easy to ignore your expectations and enjoy yourself.

Oh, and Nero, as feared, is not much more than a shallow mustache-twirling villain, with less motivation for his “revenge” than Shinzon even. Thankfully, Eric Bana does a really fantastic job in the role, and there are a few teeny tiny moments of brilliance in the script. There wasn’t anything really *wrong* with his character (let’s face it, Khan isn’t that much better than Shinzon either), but I have to say that those tiny moments represent a missed opportunity to do something more with him. The film isn’t perfect, of course, but there really aren’t many of those, so again, it stands out.

The one thing I liked about Nero and his gang is the storypoint that his crew are miners and not elite Romulan soldiers. Coupled with thier advanced 25th century technology, they’re a immense and frightening force, but on another level, they’re an even match for a clever band of humans from the 23rd century. That’s the kind of sense I like. If you make a powerful enemy for your heroes to defeat, giving them a plausible and story-appropriate weakness is better than giving the hero a last-minute advantage or table-turning Achilles heal.

To the filmmaking side of things, I loved a lot of the design in the film, including the uniforms, and especially the set design in the opening sequence aboard the Kelvin, but I thought that the art *direction* was terrible. Before you get upset, I’m not talking about the bridge or the new ship or any or that. Your opinion on that is as good as mine, but there was a odd and unexplainable inconsistency in the art direction overall, with the film not being able to decide between the glossy “Apple store” look of the Enterprise bridge, corridors, and sickbay, and the obviously redressed factory location (complete with embossed early-20th-century-era copper valves, sheesh) of the Enterprise engine room, shuttlebay and *other* corridors. That’s right, some of the corridors are gleaming white tubes, and others are concrete-floored iron-railed passageways. On the other hand, Nero’s Narada is a fully realized environment, and even though it looks a lot like the Shinzon’s ship (makes sense, right?), it feels as real as it is exotic.

One thing I’ll warn you about. If you’re seeing the film with people who are serious about Star Trek, try not to laugh too hard when you see the “Big Red Rubber Ball of Doom.” You’ll know what I mean when you see it. :-)

I also have some specific issues with some of the post production, specifically the overblown 3D embossed title cards (and the over-the-top closing credit sequence) which looks just terrible and gaudy. Also, and this is probably a matter of taste, the music just doesn’t work. It bounces between B-movie monster flick highs,and ignorable background hiss lows. This style has been used very effectively in Lost, but it’s clear that Michael Giacchino is a one-trick pony.

Also, some of the sound design and mixing is a little old-fashioned (in a bad way), like punches and slaps sounding too sharp, like stock sound effects. But this is not something which really distracts from the film (except for post production junkies like me), but I think some people will notice it.

On the other hand, the editing is really good. Bad sound design and art direction can be safely forgiven, but bad editing can’t, and just like I said about the film’s pacing, the editing is pitch perfect. It’s snappy but not zippy. The other major post-production element, the CGI, is quite daring but not as groundbreaking as we’ve been led to believe. On the other hand, it fits very nicely with the style of the live action filmed elements and as is obvious, makes for the best and more realistic space battles ever seen in a Star Trek film.

The last thing I want to say (putting my fan hat back on) is that this film is good, but it’s not good in a way which gloats over the rest of Star Trek. This is a film which really will appeal to the casual audience, not because it’s a thrilling actioneer, but because it is true to what Star Trek is, and the truth is, people like Star Trek, even if they don’t think they do.

That’s the highest compliment I can give to this film: It will make fans out of regular moviegoers, and not just in a “I can’t wait for the next one” kind of way. The movie is so reverent to the Treks of years past, and really convinces you that, in fact, this *is* your father’s Star Trek, so much so that I think this movie will get people to check out the old shows and films.

I’ve got more to say, of course (we have a few years to debate this one), but that’s it for now. Until then, go see the movie, and bring your friends and family.

39. Phil 123 - May 7, 2009

My main review. No major spoilers, but hints strongly at the fate of a couple of people so read with caution:

http://joblesshopelessworthless.blogspot.com/

But in short, I loved it. Not perfect, but all the bridge crew were great except Chekov, the story was very good if not great, and FX were out of this world, I liked the production design though agree with someone above that the bridge doesn’t feel like home.

If not the best Trek movie ever (Kahn of course) It is the most exciting, excillerating and action packed of them all.

8.5/10 if I had to give it rating.

40. Phil 123 - May 7, 2009

Oh, and to agree with The Noble Robot, the product placement was shamefull, totally not Star Trek, and enraging.

rant over.

41. knit it all - May 7, 2009

I was enraged to see such blatant product placement in a film of this calibre!

If there is one thing Star Trek should not be, it is that it should not be another medium for advertising space.

I was stunned into silence with the phenomenal and astronomically brilliant special effects. Simply amazing, in a word!

I was also rather dissapointed with the huge, nay, MASSIVe changes to the timeline.

The whole canon timeline has now been swept aside for something that might well not be… well… might not be any good.

The whole idea of the “temporal Prime Directive” has been swept aside. This would have been a Starfleet Directive that the character of Spock would have been all to aware, but instead this was ignored.

Not to mention the whole idea of “Section 31″ or “Temporal Investigations Dept”, one or both of which would have come back to prevent this change to the timeline.

No Vulcan means no possibliity of Spock being revived in the film “Search for Spock”. No Vulcan means that the various stories in TOS, TNG, DS9 etc are now meaningless…

Such a change wasn’t needed, but I’m sure JJ thinks he knows what he is doing.

I just hope that he puts things right in the next film.

Oh, and for the record… the new engine room and the “core” (when it was ejected) are totally awful.

Overall I think the film was a 7/10, but the changes to the timeline…. they get 2.5/10.

42. Dom - May 7, 2009

40. Phil 123: ‘Oh, and to agree with The Noble Robot, the product placement was shamefull,’

I think the opposite. I think the presence of Nokia communications, Budweiser beers and so on makes things far more believable. Shameful? No. Not at all.

‘totally not Star Trek, and enraging.’

That’s bollocks! Sorry, but this Star Trek is showing things we haven’t seen in the other films and shows. In Star Trek, we’ve never seen much of civilian life on Earth before this film. Reasonably, civilians will still go to the shops to buy something, someone will have to design it, manufacture it and market it.

Just because the military uses generic equipment doesn’t mean civilians do. Star Trek’s great limitation in the past is that all of its characters are in the Starfeet. This film shows us a little bit of how regular people live!

43. Dave - May 7, 2009

I am not a nitpicker in movies. But some things are sacred or “canon” and I certainly hope star trek 11 is not.
What a joke of a movie, essentially causing everything in TOS,TNG,DS9,VOY to become null and void. Unless we end up in the mirror mirror universe, or on yesterdays enterprise, star trek 11 has successfully brought the knife down on star trek.
The first hour is fine, exciting even, but the second hour drifts into a typical Hollywood blockbuster (I thought I was watching Transformers or Spiderman 3), with no respect to canon storylines.
The acting was great (9 out of 10), Character development was pretty good (8/10) – all main characters were covered well. The dialogue was pretty good between them and the bond/friendship between Spock, Kirk and bones was developing well. Scotty, Uhuru, Sulu and Chekov were all covered well in the short time a movie has available to it (although cheap laughs on Chekovs accent were silly).
The effects were great (9/10), but anyone with a laptop computer can make special effects these days.
The score was excellent (9/10), foreboding and uplifting. Dare I say it, it was star wars like.
The story – oh the story (0/10)… Checkov didn’t start on the Enterprise until season 2 of TOS – I can live with change.
Kirk’s dad didn’t die on the Kelvin – I can live with that change.
Vulcan getting destroyed on the timeline prior to kirk taking captainship of the enterprise – No, no, no. How can Spock or anyone go to Vulcan in TOS or TNG if its not there?? ( and don’t give me the new Vulcan colony as an alternative, for all intensive purposes Vulcan is the centrepiece of the star trek galaxy – and now they erased that from the timeline). How can Spock come back to life in TSFS after TWOK if Vulcan is not there?
Spocks mother dying – No, no, no. Spocks mum is a returning tour de force in TOS in helping spock develop as a Vulcan and human.
Uhura and Spocks relationship – No, no, no. Kirk and Uhuru made history by promoting an interracial kiss on TV. That can happen now (as oppose to an interspecies kiss).
The new timeline – this just doesn’t cut it. The “new timeline” mantra is a cheap way out. Why could they have just made a start up story to Kirks first 5 year voyage as captain? Oh why?
Leonard Nimoy saying the captains “Boldly go….”- No, no, no. That is the captains…
They say star trek needed a reboot, maybe so, but not a new story. Essentially the heart of star trek has been replaced by Hollywood blockbuster. The idea of this movie is purely economics – to get those people who are not familiar, or only vaguely familiar with star trek to go and see the movie. Which they will succeed in doing. Devout trek fans will be left out in the cold, alienated, and left quivering for what “could have been”. The process of making copious money has overtaken the rich history (or future) of star trek.
This movie will succeed in its goal and sell millions of tickets, it will be the highest grossing star trek film, and it will spawn sequels. Unfortunately it all is irrelevant as the timeline Roddenberry invented has now been wiped.
As far as I am concerned there are only 10 star trek films that are canon.
Ok before I get the reply “this movie is not a prequel, its a reboot”. Its not a reboot its a money making exercise. This star trek has nothing to do with the star trek universe except to get bums on seats and money for Hollywood studios.

44. knit it all - May 7, 2009

Oh, I also wanted to add that the idea that Robert Ocri suggested that the “original universe is still intact”… what rot!

With the huge changes made in this film, there is not “original universe” unless the sequel puts everything right. Something I very much doubt will ever happen. :(

I can live in hope, but like those I went to see this film with, we doubt that it will ever be the same Trek again. Sadly…

45. Dom - May 7, 2009

41. knit it all: ‘The whole idea of the “temporal Prime Directive” has been swept aside . . . the whole idea of “Section 31″ or “Temporal Investigations Dept”, one or both of which would have come back to prevent this change to the timeline.’

Good riddance! They were boring!

‘No Vulcan means no possibliity of Spock being revived in the film “Search for Spock”.’

Assuming Spock dies battling Khan Singh in 15 years’ time!

‘No Vulcan means that the various stories in TOS, TNG, DS9 etc are now meaningless…’

Far from it. It simply means they happen a bit differently. Vulcan barely features after TOS anyway. Of course Tuvok probably got splatted . . . ha ha!!

‘. . .but I’m sure JJ thinks he knows what he is doing.’

Better than most of us!

‘I just hope that he puts things right in the next film.’

In other word his the coward button: the reset switch? Nope!

43. Dave: ‘Spocks mother dying – No, no, no. Spocks mum is a returning tour de force in TOS in helping spock develop as a Vulcan and human.’

And in death, it seems, she achieves the same thing!

‘Devout trek fans will be left out in the cold, alienated, and left quivering for what “could have been”. ‘

No, weirdoes with no lives will be left out in the cold, alienated, and left quivering for what “could have been”, while most people including Trek fans will be very happy! LOL!

46. Dom - May 7, 2009

44. knit it all: ‘Oh, I also wanted to add that the idea that Robert Ocri suggested that the “original universe is still intact”… what rot!’

It’s still there if you want it to be or it’s gone if you want it to be. Use your own imagination, rather than expect to be spoonfed! What next? An explanation for Khan not removing his glove?

‘like those I went to see this film with, we doubt that it will ever be the same Trek again.’

Good!

47. Val Jean - May 7, 2009

8.5/10

WOW! saw the movie at 6:30 at Imax in Melbourne, and there was a good vibe among the crowd even before the movie started.The star trek theme was playing before the movie, getting everyone in the mood beforehand.
The opening scene is amazing, just wished i could of seen more of Captain Robau.

Effects were spectacular, the character moments really hit home, the mannerisms and phrases of the crew all homaging the original’s performances, and there was even a slight cheer when Spock Prime appeared!

The only things that irked me were 1) The romance in the film was alluded to WAY too subtly before being slapping us in the face with it, and
2) the shaky ‘bay’ style camera work made it hard to follow the action scenes, although this could be because we are used to seeing starships always oriented the right way, and slow panning shots of the ships, not 360 views like JJ has done.

And of course, the defining moment was the final monologue by spock prime, which made us realise this movie was made just to get them on the bridge, the real adventures of the enterprise are still to come, and i say BRING IT ON!

48. dave - May 7, 2009

45. Dom – May 7, 2009
you are the target audience. non trekkies. star trek achieved that goal. well done.

no need to get personal – “weirdoes with no lives “. Everyone has an opinion. Its a pity some cant say theirs without insult.

trekkies are the poeple who kept star trek alive for all these years. TOS never would have been re-aired, and subseqeunt shows made, had it not been for the positive action of so many “weirdo’s”.

This is definitely not “Roddenberry’s Star Trek”. Good or bad that is for each individual to decide.

Can anyone honestly say the motive behind this movie was to develop the star trek universe, as opposed to making a blockbuster. Good or bad that is what it was.

And as Aunt Sally said to Huck Finn – just because it is popular doesnt make it right.

49. TrekFanMA - May 7, 2009

Just got back from the movie and will be a Spock fan forever. Having said that there was one part of the plot I did not like, so ultimately I liked it as much as I thought I would.

By all means go see it even thought I gave it a 5/10.

50. The Beezer - May 7, 2009

I have to say I agree with Dave on this one. After years of eager anticipation for this spectacle, I have to say I left the theater 20 minutes ago feeling… left out. Disappointed might be more accurate, but its rather difficult to say where I actually fall on this movie.

I don’t want to rehash what has already been stated here on this message board, so I won’t delve into the specifics of each character, plot line, etc. I will say that the significant differences in “canon” were sufficiently explained away, at least enough for this hard core Trekker to not be too insulted that Captain Pike was promoted to Admiral rather than dieing on a training starship.

Was this an action packed blockbuster with amazing special effects that combined fun with sex and wit? Yes. So in that sense, mission accomplished. But I left the theater feeling like I had missed something. What it is I can’t yet quite put my finger on, but I think part of my issue has less to do with anything JJ or the Supreme Court consciously did, and rather what they took out.

I understand this movie was edited to fit a certain time frame, but there was just too much plot advancement at the beginning of the film to really allow me to get to know these actors, and the new light my favorite characters were being portrayed in. And why the hell is a super villian with superior technology from the future going to wait 25 YEARS before completeing his dastardly deed???

Obviously, my gripe has little to do with geeky, trekky “cannon” and more to do with story telling 101. Overall the plot was indeed engaging, and in general I liked the way the story was told… but there were times where things got a bit “out of control”, and in order to get things back on track I felt as if the director and/or the writers pulled some silly concepts out of their butt for the sake of keeping the story from derailing.

I mean, c’mon… Pike gets done lecturing Kirk about how the Federation is a vast interstellar “peacekeeping and humanitarian armada”, and yet there are NO STARSHIPS or commissioned personnel to help save Vulcan, that they are putting college kids in harm’s way? A stretch, to be sure.

And the ending… does Old Spock (or “Spock Prime” as he has been referred to on this website) ever go home? Did Nero just die? Temporal Prime Directive? Ok, so that gets a little too much into the whole canon side of geekdom, but I do in fact feel that there is too little character resolution.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I was entertained, thrilled in fact to see the dynamics between the actors and how their characters were reimagined by a new generation of writers and directors. By far the best performances came from Pegg and Urban, whos Scotty and McCoy were just spot on, in my humble opinion. Right behind them were of course Kirk and Spock, and seeing them start off as rivals was a very compelling new way to introduce them to a new audience. Kudos there to Orci and Kurtzman. The others… well… they were fine. But just like the original series, I know nothing new about them that I didn’t know 20 years ago.

However, there was just something missing. Perhaps an expository on George and Winnona Kirk may have helped, or had we spent some extra time on Vulcan with the young Spock, or even if we had spent more time at the Academy seeing Kirk and McCoy skip class… SOMETHING, ANYTHING. But alas, we jump right into sending these college kids out to presumably die, because there is no one else in the entire universe who can save the day.

Granted, I knew I was going to have to stretch my imagination a bit to make all of this work… but none the less, the issue is there. The most disappointing for me at least was the musical score. I believe it was jeff up above who claims that Giacchino’s score harkens back to the old days of Jerry Goldsmith, James Horner and of course Alexander Courage. I couldn’t disagree more. It wasn’t a bad score, I’ll grant you that. But most of the different films over the years can be identified by their signature sound, most notably Star Trek’s 1, 2, and First Contact. There was something unique there, something I had never heard before. In this installment, I felt like Giacchino pulled out an old Batman Returns sheet music piece and added a few notes to it. The best part of his set is the last song, a redux of the original Theme from the 1960’s.

When I sat down here at my computer, I really didn’t want this to be a negative review. My intent is not to bash the film, because it did what we all knew it was supposed to do, bring in EVERYONE. I just feel there was a few things missing, thats all… oh and my disappointment in Giacchino. The film was good, and I do recommend everyone see it… but don’t just say you “LOVE IT ITS THE BEST FILM EVER” just for the sake of saying so. Take a moment to really look into the plot, analyze what you’re seeing, and then make a judgement call.

Is the franchise in good hands?? You bet. But perhaps, the next time around, find a better editor. Don’t take so much out, let it run however long it needs to run!

51. AJ - May 7, 2009

The film lives up to my high expectations and more. The casting was superlative, and Winona Ryder brought a tear to my eye.

Bob Orci, resident Trekker, and Alex Kurtzman, really delivered a nice juicy chunk of Star Trek. The main crew was wonderful, and it worked on sever levels for me.

I wish these helmers the best Go get ‘em, guys!

52. The Beezer - May 7, 2009

Oh, and @Dom 45 & 46 , get off the keyboard, its past your bed time. Save the intelligent discourse for the big boys and girls.

53. saw-it!! - May 7, 2009

well… i thought i´d be blown away!! for the first half of it i was… but then delta vega comes, and it´s downhill from there: it turns into a blurry tng sort of thing… storywise at least… but I definitely need to take a second look at it!!

everything else (character develpoment, FX, action sequences, etc!!) is a solid 9/10!!

54. rnnstp - May 7, 2009

This is the death of the franchise. This abomination of a movie does even more damage to the franchise than ST:NEMESIS and ENTERPRISE combined! Canon has been turned on it’s ear, brutally sodomized, and ripped to shreds by the people running the franchise like a mad child who’s found his father’s loaded AK-47! These people do not understand STAR TREK at all. And if any of you people who are so happily praising this movie are lifelong legacy fans, then you could be sold a heaping pile of deep-fried canine excrement as a meal! TRUE lifelong legacy fans should boycott anything CBS/PARAMOUNT, and anything ABC for that matter for their connection to J.J. Abrams through LOST, a show that I loved until seeing Abrams’ carnage tonight. Let’s hire some lawyers and file our class-action suit!

55. Captain Kathryn - May 7, 2009

Just returned from seeing Star Trek at the IMAX. The baton has been passed. I am a TOS viewer, but I thought the movie was exceptional.. I would have like to see more conversation in the storyline rather than so much action. The one think that really drew me to Star Trek in the 60’s as a young preteen andthen the movies, was the intelligence of the show. It really showed interaction between the characters, more so than so much starship fights. I detected Star Wars in that , which I never cared for . Another thing was Spock’s mother did not die in the show or themovies, but she does in this movie. Maybe I missed something on the timeline, but did Nero destroy Vulcan. I need to see it again It is very fast paced, which the theater was jam=packed full of old and new trekkers. W E even had two people in Star fleet uniform there. OK, but as I mentioned the baton has been passed, not only from Shatner to Pine, or Nimoy to Quinto, but from the older trekkers to the new ones. LIfe goes on. Overall I would rate themovie a 7/10. I really would like to see them do something with the bridge , maybe add some color. Too much glare and reflection. Bridge did not impress me at all or the engine room.

56. Jim Durdan - May 7, 2009

54, they are casting for Trolls for the Hobbit film, I think you might want to go and try out.

57. Batman 61021 - May 7, 2009

The king is dead. Long live the king!

Well, after all this anticipation, I just saw the movie. It is definitely not my father’s Star Trek, nor is it mine. Mine died at the end of Star Trek VI 18 years ago (can that be right, 18 years?)

Still, this is a very good film. Good on every level, but that stupid lens flare and shaky camera robbed the viewer of so much. WIthout out those distractions, a great film indeed and well worthy of the mantle Star Trek. Perhaps this will be my sons’ Star Trek.

58. rnnstp - May 7, 2009

56, I’ll feed my beagle an extra-large meal and get that deep-fryer ready. I’ll only charge you $10, and if you want dessert…I have some cats that can accommodate you in that way as well. LOL

59. Devon - May 7, 2009

#54 – Speak intelligently first and stop trolling please.

60. Steven - May 7, 2009

After months of speculation, nitpicking and anticipation, J.J. Abrams reboot of the “Star Trek” franchise has hit the big screen in a fantastic, exciting and character-driven piece that is nothing short of remarkable, reinvigorating a franchise long thought dead. While it is by no means the best “Trek” film, it is still a great one nonetheless. While some fans may pick at some of the things in this film, I myself thought the story was great, and honored Gene Roddenberry’s epic vision. The cast was fantastic, and the visual effects and action sequences were something startling to behold. I recommend it to Trekkies and non-trekkies alike.

Grade: 9 out of 10, or A-

61. Wicketsc - May 7, 2009

54 – You can spearhead the boycott from your mother’s basement.

62. Devon - May 7, 2009

Dave – It seems you maybe didn’t get the point of the film with the inconsistencies you have pointed out.

63. NCC-1971 - May 7, 2009

Just saw the new Trek….

Wow! Did THAT suck!

Nic Meyer, you’re still king.

JJ Abrams, thanks for nothing.

64. John - May 7, 2009

Just got back from watching it. Amazing! Even if it was my second time. Will probably watch again before the weekend is over.

65. Bob Bobberson - May 7, 2009

I’ve been a trekker all my life, and I watched was really looking forward to this movie. I am pleased to report that I wasn’t disappointed.

The only issue I had with the film , which was said in some early reviews, is that it at times seemed like it was trying to essentially force characters into the spots they need to be for the sequel. This doesn’t bother me terribly though for one reason; I loved Batman Begins, but I think The Dark Knight was the better movie because everything was finally in place and their was no obligation to set anything up.

I will address a few minor gripes I had and how I would have dealt with them differently.

First: I found it completely unbelievable that Kirk could skip from a cadet to captain of a starship. This was almost so unbelievable that it could have undermined the entire movie if the rest of it wasn’t so well crafted.

What bothers me is that the writers didn’t need to engage in this, to quote a pointy eared friend, “most illogical” leap in rank. Instead of flashing to the academy years when Kirk was a cadet, why not jump to him coming back for command training after a few years on a starship or something? I think that it would have actually made more sense to have the Kobiyashi Maru as some kind of test for command applicants. It would have also made his sudden promotion to captain much more credible.

Second: I hated Chekov. I just didn’t get his purpose. Most of the other characters’ entries were fairly seamless, however why not save a few. It feels like it would have made more sense to introduce him as some new whiz kid in the sequel.

Finally: I just want to repeat… this was definitely the best trek since WOK. What most excites me is that they now have license to explore the endless plotl ines that were introduced in the original series when it was on television. A lot of the ideas for episodes could definitely be expanded into feature length films. I hope they tap this resource (ie I would love to see a feature length Space Seed or The Doomsday Machine).

Also, like I said I am a lifelong trekker. But given the plot complications, part of me kind of just wishes that they had said f&*k it, and done a clean reboot without the need to explore time travel or anything.

66. New Horizon - May 7, 2009

48. dave – May 7, 2009

I’m a Trekkie, I loved the film, and it IS Roddenberry’s Trek….just a different presentation of it. The characters are still there, just channeled through new actors. I think they did a beautiful job with it. You don’t speak for all Trekkies..so get over yourself.

My review: I’ll keep it short and sweet.

8/10

There were some ‘convenient’ moments, and I felt Nero could have handled a bit more back story, but I understand that they were trying to keep the story moving at a brisk pace…it just felt a bit too brisk at times.

The new design of the ship looked much better on screen, and I think it fit the look of this movie. The original ship wouldn’t have fit here, not because it would look back on screen…it just wouldn’t fit the style.

Overall, I loved the film. Very well done and I look forward to an even stronger sequel.

67. Rah - May 7, 2009

Must go to sleep, saw the movie at 7:00 at Rainbow Cinema’s in London, Ontario, Canada. All in all, I understand the cannon issues, the universe reset, reboot concerns. but it turned out to be a very good movie, 9.75 outta 10.

68. New Horizon - May 7, 2009

50. The Beezer – May 7, 2009
“…. at least enough for this hard core Trekker to not be too insulted that Captain Pike was promoted to Admiral rather than dieing on a training starship. ”

Pike never died in the original universe either.

69. Pizza - May 7, 2009

Just returned from seeing Star Trek. I’ll start by saying I’ll give it 8.5 out of 10. This is my first gut reaction without thinking too much about it. And they say go with your first instinct. So 8.5 it is.

Things that prevented a higher score.

Too much camera jitter. Very annoying.
Lens flares. Again, too distractng.
Not long enough. Not enough time for more character development and a decent story. You’re bringing this whole crew together as a launch for at least two more movies?. What about Scotty’s past? McCoy’s past? etc…
The inside of a Star ship looked liked the entrails of a hydro electric power plant.

Things that gave it a higher score.
Without a doubt the cast was brilliant. It would be too difficult to single out one or two. Cudos across the board
LIttle touches of script to remind you of TOS.

The movie and screenplay were resonable. Nothing spectacular, but compared to the last 2 movies, almost anything half decent was going to succeed. Having some real money and decent budget certainly helps as well.

Good luck on the next one Bob and Alex. The expectations will be higher, and not as forgiving as I was for this one.

70. Aragorn189 - May 7, 2009

I got back about an hour ago from seeing it and I’m still pumping with adrenaline and have a smile from ear to ear. This met all of my expectations. Every actor captured the spirit of the original actor but still made the roll their own. Also, the bits and little homages to the Trekkies abound. From elements that some have wanted to see for a long time to actual shots mirroring shots from previous films (Enterprise Torpedo shot in Star Trek III), they really put a whole lot of easter eggs in there. The production design was top notch. Everything made sense from the view that JJ was taking. Overall a solid film and by far the best Trek Movie to grace the silver screen in a long time. I’d put it up there with Star Trek II. If I can get my hands on some more money, I’m going to go see it again.

71. saw-it!! - May 7, 2009

oh well… i feel i might have been too harsh with the “downhill from delta vega”, “blurry tng thing” comment… i take it back!!!

I LOVED it but i need a second viewing (plus i got really distracted midway through: too much soda, my bad, had to run out during platform battle)…

need to say it was full of emotional moments, easter eggs and the like… plus great scenes in space and with all the characters… I LOVED IT!!

72. Christian - May 7, 2009

Okay, just got back from seeing it. Here we go.

First, I am a 21 year old TNG fan, never was a huge fan of TOS, but loved their movies.

The movie was fast. Too fast. I understand that Trek needed to be sped up, but not quite this much. Don’t get me wrong, I like that they talk faster, the action scenes were right, but the plot moved too fast. I wanted them to just take a breath after big things happened, but they really didn’t. Every single scene was “in your face”. And again, that is great for movies, but I worry that the average moviegoer will be confused in trying to understand the plot. As the NPR reviewer said, ‘by the middle of the movie, who cares if you understand what’s going on, just have fun’, and I completely agree. Again, Trek fans should understand (we are used to time travel, although I NEVER want to see it be used again), but I don’t think most people will.

The acting was superb. I mean, really superb. Music was absolutely brilliant (sounds much better in the film than on the soundtrack). SFX were awesome. And I can’t wait for the sequel, but next time, no time travel.

Overall 7.5/10

73. rnnstp - May 7, 2009

Where were the Enterprise’s and Kelvin’s large interior scenes filmed at: the inside of a old abandoned DOW chemical plant, or was it Proctor and Gamble?

74. Robert Gillis - May 7, 2009

Film is going to be one of the greatest blockbusters of the year and will easily out-profit all previous Trek films.

Scope is epic – NEVER seen anything like this in Trek.

Casting perfect. Bruce Greenwood as Pike amazing.

Love the subtle nods to past Trek: The tribble, Admiral Archers Beagle

NO role mis-cast

Film needs to be seen multiple times – so much going on all the time. Constant moving, constant action.

Nimoy’s role not a cameo; very, very poignant.

Not clear if previous “Original” time line survives.

New timeline brilliant: Allows real danger: Could not believe who dies, what gets destroyed.

Nimoy as Spock cries. Spock prime from 2387. Love the new star dates: Movie takes place in 2258.

Enterprise is just fine; yes very advanced but believable. The ship works.

Writers learned from past mistakes of spending too much time with villain talking (Insurrection, Nemesis). Nero appears as needed to advance story.

Not sure how history web sites Trek will treat “history”: Best to make it its own universe.

Bridge is phenomenal. Lens flares not as bothersome as I thought.

Ben Cross as Sarek is exceptional; but I missed Mark Lenard. RIP. Sarek’s admission that he loves Amanda – powerful.

Winona Rider fine as Amanda. Would have liked to see more.

Romance between Uhura and Spock felt very natural and not forced.

Chekov brilliant – saves the day more than once.

LOVED how Kirk gets on the Enterprise.

Uhura FINALLY important team member.

Scotty mostly played for laughs, not a great deal of screen time. Accent perfect.

First minutes of movie breathtaking; NEVER seen Trek this large.

Kobayashi Maru was hilarious; Kirk’s actions (and eating an apple) nice not to Wrath of Khan.

Music awesome.

Special effects beyond belief.

Vulcan council speaks of Spock’s “disadvantage” and elaborates that he is half human. When he rejects their admission offer, his “Live long and prosper” can be translated as, “Go screw yourselves.”

Destruction of seven starships far more effective than anything scene before.

Dynamic between Pine and Quinto is comparable to Shatner and Nimoy.

Love how the view screen is a window.

Warp effect excellent.

Dedicated to Gene and Majel – very appropriate.

Beautiful to have Nimoy’s “Space the final frontier.”

Death of George Kirk heartbreaking

All set designs feel familiar – and new.

Spock to Kirk: “: out of the chair!”

Kirks’ promotion a little too quick; some events DO happen too fast but that’s OK.

Beyond perfect; beyond brilliant.

Mr. Abrams, Mr. Orci, Mr. Kurtzman, and Mr. Nimoy: THANK YOU.

75. StarTux - May 7, 2009

I was excited to hear the new “Star Trek” movie score by Michael Giacchino, so I went to the mall and picked up the only copy at FYE. This should have clued me in – it most certainly was an omen. I have always been interested in the thematic components of great scores, and was hoping for a continuation in the tradition of “Star Trek” scores by Goldsmith, Horner, McCarthy et al, and was gravely disappointed. Giacchino is certainly no hack, as it takes talent to undertake an orchestral score, but they sent a minor league player into the big league, and it was an embarrasment. After the first complete listening to the score, I regretted my purchase, and really wanted to return it.
The fifteen tracks have a John Tesh-like treatment of a five note theme that is repeated ad naseam. There is only one track that has a weird string sound that stands out from the rest of the score. Even the classic Trek theme by Courage and Roddenberry is polluted with the trivial new theme. One of the statements by J.J. Abrams about the story being about characters is never translated to the music. I was hoping for themes for the characters to enjoy a la John Williams, but it never materialized.
I am one of the first to get a ticket for the movie, and still have high hopes for it, but to quote Han Solo – ” I have a bad feeling about this.”
————————————————————–
Just returned from the theatre….oh,my Solo was right.
I give it 5 out of 10…The acting is good, the effects are passible, the music is a sham. What always drew me to the program was the story and the characters…but bottom line, was the sense of hopefullness that Roddenberry instilled. He also gave limitations to the world they inhabited. I feel that the movie will appeal to the ipod generation; after all the Enterprise does look like the Apple store. With the dispatching of Vulcan, and Spock’s mother Amanda, it feels like a free for all to all that has passed, and make that old world as disposible as a Whopper (tie-in duly noted). To an old Trekker like myself, it feels as if the world is heeping praise on something the level of Star Trek:Enterprise – BLEAH!

76. Father Robert Lyons - May 7, 2009

Long story short, my website has my review of the film, but I am more excited about a sequel than this film.

77. Justin B Star Trek Lexington Co Executive Producer - May 7, 2009

One amazeing movie experience
Review by
Justin Burton Co Executive Producer
Star Trek Lexington

Ok To Start the night off.

I arrived to people accutally waiting out side an (hour and a half early i might add.)

To watch Star Trek 2009

To simply put this experience
WOW!

The new movie revamps the series. It does indeed explore the origns of the cast we know and love.
Its action pact from the second the opening theme ends. Its done in such a way
That it keeps you on the edge of your seat threw out the entire experience.
From the first scenes on the Kelvin To the last few of the movie ( No Spoilers here sorry ) It just invisions the universe in such a way that is true to what Star Trek is all about. The Human Experience .
Everything Feels so real to the ship to the warp drive. Each of the cast plays their role to the letter and the Kirk and Spock Relaitionship comes along in a way that would make sence in the trekverse.

This movie is WORTH every penny of Ticket Cost! Every LAST Dime! Dont watch this one online as it will take from the experience!
Everything from the new sets to the new Enterprise her self The music score is AWSOME and plays homage to Treks past.

This is one fan boy who is Truely Pleased with the new movie. All The Naysayers Yes you know who you are.! Can Rest Easy Star Trek is in Good Hands With JJ and the new Cast.!
WELL DONE Guys Well Done Indeed.!

78. Author of "The Vulcan Neck Pinch for Fathers" - May 7, 2009

Star Trek is back. And, in a manner of speaking, its never been back quite like this.

I sat back in my seat, not knowing quite what to expect despite a deluge of spoilers, trailers, and hints, and ultimately I realized the very best way to let this new Trek was to sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride – to let Trek weave itself around you like a great, immersive ride you know exists only in fantasy. And despite Trek’s two-hour running time, you knew the time would pass too quickly. Surely, just as I got to know these new characters, it was time to let them go again. It truly is an epic ride you didn’t want to end.

There’s no practical way to describe this realization of Trek in Trek’s own terms, because Trek has never been done quite like this before. To say this is a reboot of the Trek franchise is to do a disservice to the broader soul of this movie, because it doesn’t just reboot, it *reimagines* Trek. It is a brilliant way of blowing things apart, sometimes literally, to keep everything together.

Are there shocking moments? Yes. Are there frightening moments? Surely. Does everything work? Almost, but no; however, in most cases, the things that don’t work are nitpicks.The score is only average; some of the Enterprise interiors don’t look like those of a “new” ship, but such notes are secondary. Do they mess with canon? You can’t answer that with a simple “yes” or “no,” but if your only reason to see the movie is to rationalize a predisposition to dislike it merely for the notion of tampering with canon, then don’t bother. This movie is an epic tale told on a massive scale, a new painting on the corner of a fresh canvas with characters we all know, but have a chance to know all over again. That’s delightfully unique in pop culture, and leave it to Trek and the Abrams crowd to figure out a way to make it happen. It is a mammoth undertaking to make everything old somehow new again, and darned if Abrams didn’t just pull it off.

How can you describe this Trek? Intense. Driven. Purposeful. And this brand of Trek will find itself drawn to different kinds of stories in its future. This Trek probably won’t be spending a lot of time in the briefing room, and its hard to imagine someone like Jean Luc Picard commanding anything resembling a ship following the genesis of this Enterprise. And if that all doesn’t make sense, once you see the movie, it will. And to be sure, Leonard Nimoy’s presence is brilliantly conceived, and just as brilliantly portrayed.

There’s a wonderful and different future ahead for Trek, one with stories untold like a blank sheet of paper in an old-guard typewriter. And the vigorous way this Trek promises to tell those stories could best be summed up in the response of my wide-eyed 13-year-old son, just as the credits rolled…

“That was awesome.”

Nuff said.

79. Jim Durdan - May 7, 2009

It is unfortunate that Star Trek fans have devolved into the kind of people that killed the original series to begin with. Unbending to new ideas, resentful that what they have held as an absolute truth for 40 years has been challenged, and unable to break from the past. Whats more, unless Trek can pull in a new and younger audience, then the truth is that Trek, as an industry, is done.

Fact, post nemesis, the prospect of another Trek movie was dead.

Fact, post Star Trek Enterprise. the prospects of another Trek TV series were dead.

Fact, is this movie bombs, then Trek is dead. In my view, it is a great Trek film. J.J. did not ignore the fans, he embraced them. But he also made this movie accessible to the general public. Is that a bad thing? Is reacting out to a larger audience a bad thing?

You know what’s been killing the franchise? Not bad movies, or TV Shows or novels. What has been killing the franchise are fans who think that because they have invested so much time in the Trek Universe, they are “owed” something by it. Great bird forbid that Trek try something new and different, because a small but vocal minority will scream heretic. They will threaten boycotts and law suits and pledge their undieing support to some other sci fi franchise because “Trek” has betrayed them, never once realizing that Trek hasn’t turned it’s fictional back on them, but that they have become so entrenched in their investment in the property that they are either unwilling or unable to accept any change in the status quo. Even is that status quo is over 40 years old and moribund. Trek is moribund, and will either live on as the combined vision of JJ and Gene, or it will die a solitary death caused by the very people who love it the most.

80. dave - May 7, 2009

66.

no you are not.

81. Charles Trotter - May 7, 2009

Three years. That is how long I have been looking forward to this movie (and most of you, I’m sure). From the moment it was first announced in April 2006 up through today, my anticipation for this movie has steadily increased. Tonight, I finally got to see if the waiting and anticipating was worth it. And holy crap, was it ever.

In simple terms, “Star Trek” is awesome! I have been a Trek fan for many years and have seen every movie and every episode of every TV show and none of them thrilled me as much as this one. This is quite possibly the best Trek ever, and it’s definitely one of the best movies I have ever seen.

Director J.J. Abrams and writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman have outdone themselves by doing what many believed was impossible. They have not only revitalized the Trek franchise by making a great sci-fi/action saga that would appeal to a wider audience, they have done so while maintaining the spirit of the original “Star Trek” series.

The extent to which the writers alter Trek history might be met with anger by those I call “Trek Extremists,” but the story is so good and the characters so lovingly written, I did not see it as a huge issue. In fact, I think it was a smart move. After all, if the movie was set in the old timeline, there would be little suspense or surprises because we already know what happens to the characters. As controversial as it may be, the writers handled it beautifully and without a hint of disrespect. They definitely know their stuff.

The recasting of Kirk, Spock, and the other iconic characters from the original Trek is perfect, and the performances are top notch. There was as much care in casting as there was in writing the movie. All of the actors do wonderful jobs with their characters, with the standouts being Simon Pegg’s Scotty and Karl Urban’s McCoy. The supporting cast does great work, as well, particularly Bruce Greenwood, who owns the role of Captain Pike.

My only real issue with the movie is the lack of screentime given to Winona Ryder (Amanda, Spock’s mother), Jennifer Morrison (Winona, Kirk’s mother), Clifton Collins, Jr. (Ayel, Nero’s henchman), and especially Eric Bana as the film’s villain, Nero. All did good work in their roles, I just wish we could have seen more of them. There were a few other very minor things about the movie that didn’t work for me, but they’re so minor they’re not even worth mentioning.

The visual effects are possibly the best I have ever seen in any film, certainly in any Trek film. Industrial Light & Magic and Visual Effects Supervisor Roger Guyett have surpassed all of their prior work, in my humble opinion. The visuals were nothing short of awe-inspiring, yet, at the same time, they didn’t completely rule the movie. Make no mistake, the stars of this movie are the characters, not the effects.

“Star Trek” is full of almost non-stop action, but it also has a lot of humor and a lot of heart. Did everything about it work? No, of course not. But most of it did work, and it worked brilliantly. I commend Abrams, Orci, Kurtzman, and everyone else who helped make this Trek a truly glorious enterprise. Like “The Dark Knight” before it, “Star Trek” lives up to the hype, and it was most definitely worth the three years of waiting and anticipation.

82. James Kirk's Unknown Son - May 7, 2009

One of the marketing slogans for the Star Trek (2009) was: “This is not your father’s Star Trek…”

True enough, if they were talking about my father. But if the statement was directed at my 22-year-old daughter, the statement is incorrect.

It is my Star Trek, only it’s been reimagined through a 21st century lens by writers Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman, and director J.J. Abrams.

When I saw first saw Star Trek in 1966, it was through a mid-to-late 20th century lens from forty-plus years ago. Much has changed in our technology since then; much has changed in the technology and special effects of filmmaking. And boy is it evident with Star Trek (2009), in very exciting and positive ways.

What is seen and experienced in Star Trek (2009) may very well be what would have been seen and experienced, had Gene Roddenberry not created the series in 1966, and it only now came out as a bold and fresh new story. The franchise has been truly updated and revamped, and properly so, through contemporary eyes; the movie is truly an incredible and fascinating ride. The special effects, the cinematography, and the scoring all worked in perfect pitch together. The tight script was full of homages to these beloved and enduring characters, and the story worked quite well for me. Also, there was plenty of humor, which is something that Star Trek always had from the early days.

While Star Trek (2009) is full of action and is very fast-paced, the central fascination for me was the development of the friendship and teamwork of two science-fiction icons: James T. Kirk and the half-human, half-Vulcan Spock. When the two first meet, they are pitted against one another. Much of the movie centers around how these two great characters work through their differences to form a formidable team.

Having cut my teeth on these two characters at an early age, I was acutely aware of the nuances of each character, and I can confidently say that Chris Pine (as Kirk) and Zachary Quinto (as Spock) nailed them. Both parts were played to near perfection without mimicry of the original actors William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy.

The supporting cast was also well done. Karl Urban as Dr. Leonard “Bones” McCoy was exceptional. Zoe Saldana (Uhura), Simon Pegg (Scotty), John Cho (Sulu) and Anton Yelchin (Chekov) were all very well played. Bruce Greenwood as Captain Christopher Pike was outstanding.

After a powerful tear-jerking prologue that culminates with the death of George Kirk (the father of James Kirk), we find that an “alternate reality” has been set in motion. While many things have stayed as we knew them in the original Star Trek, there have been some notable changes (and I thought they worked well). Chief among them, James Kirk has been raised without his father George Kirk, who in the prologue dies in battle with the movie’s villain, a rogue Romulan name Nero (played very well by Eric Bana). Also among the changes we see in this alternate reality is that Uhura very much has an unexpected love interest. Cool.

The villain Nero has come back in time, seeking retribution for an event that occurred in the future. He wishes to destroy the Federation and a certain Vulcan who he believes had an integral role in the destruction of his home planet, Romulus. Spock (Leonard Nimoy), of the original timeline, and Nero have both been inadvertently sent back in time through the black hole that destroyed Nero’s planet, and both have ended up 120 years in the past. Nero’s battle with the USS Kelvin alters the original time line (starting with the death of George Kirk).

I know that some have remarked that they could not accept the field promotion of James Kirk from Starfleet cadet to First Officer of the Enterprise. This did not bother me. I know that Captain Pike obviously sees enormous potential in the young Kirk, and correctly so, and so acts on his instincts to promote him. Case closed. A captain of a starship is quite powerful.

My non-Trekkie wife greatly enjoyed the movie right along with me. We both will see it again soon. I allowed her to rate it first, on a scale of four stars; she instantly said “Four stars.”

I completely agreed.

After the movie, my wife told me that she now envied me, because of my knowledge of and familiarity with these incredible characters, all of whom have been reinvigorated in this wonderful new adventure.

Star Trek is now guaranteed to live long and prosper, thanks to Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman, who took a huge and gutsy chance. Well, it worked, just like James Kirk told Spock it would work, despite the chances being less than five percent (you’ll know where I get this from when you see the movie). I now am extremely anxious to see another adventure with this new Enterprise crew.

I hope you enjoy it as much as I did, because in my opinion, this movie totally kicked ass.

According to trekmovie.com’s scale, 9.9.

83. Darryl - May 7, 2009

I love everything about the new movie!!! I had one joygasm after another while watching it!
Haters be damned, this movie put Trek back on the rails. and I could not possibly be more pleased!!!!

84. TREKKIE369 - May 7, 2009

IT’S BACK!!!!!!!!!!

I give the Movie a 10/10. It is great. The acting is superb, the direction is great, and Nimoy is wonderful as always.

The first seven minutes of the movie with the USS Kelvin almost made me cry, and I DON’T cry. It truly demonstrates the scope of the movie. After that they show the basic set up of the characters, which is done wonderfully. This includes two amusing scenes of young Kirk, and young Spock.

After that, the movie speeds up, and the story, acting, directing, everything is great. I won’t get into too much detail here because I don’t want to give too many spoilers away. But it is great.

The only two small problems I have with the movie are the extremely rapid ascension of Kirk’s rank, and how they work out the different timelines. I am fully expecting that the timelines will be dealt with properly by the end of the ‘hopefully’ trio of movies. (I can’t imagine that Orci and Kurtsman could let it end any other way.

Other than that, ST09 is one of or is the best.

Oh, and everyone should see a great photo of Wil Wheaton right after he saw the movie. The link is on the tidbits for t-1 day.

WooHoo! Star Trek is BACK!

85. J. Michael Roddy - May 7, 2009

So I have waited to post my review of Star Trek until now out of respect for all of those who would be seeing it tonight. That being out of the way, I can not contain my thoughts any longer. So, your first question… who cares what I think of the new Star Trek movie?

Well here is some perspective. Star Trek has been one constant through my entire forty years of existence. I discovered it when I was a toddler and immediately fell in love with the characters and the stories. I can not begin to tabulate the countless hours I have spent living in the world of the United Federation of Planets. The hours I ran through the playgrounds, doing shoulder rolls and flipping open a toy communicator, believing that Scotty would beam me up. The years of reading every book, every comic, collecting cards, hanging posters on the walls and enjoying the 79 hours of adventure of the starship Enterprise.

When sadness or sorrow would come crashing into my young world, there were those members of the crew, ready to take me everywhere from Tantalus IV to Wrigley’s Pleasure planet.

As I got older, and discovered Star Wars, the crew of the Enterprise lived peacefully with the Rebels and the Skywalkers.

I remember how excited I was for STAR TREK THE MOTION PICTURE. How THE WRATH OF KHAN affected me and when I went on THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK.

I enjoyed the NEXT GENERATION, and was thrilled to have more adventures, but it was always the Original Series that was my favorite, as the explored strange new worlds, I could quote every line.

Now, there is a new STAR TREK movie. I have been so anxious to see a new adventure set in that original series timeline. I was fortunate, thanks to my great friend Jon Donahue to attend a screening at Paramount in California. The absolute best way to see a paramount movie is in the Paramount screening room. As the lights came down, I was nervous. This was a huge part of my life. So how was it?

The new Star Trek movie is everything I hoped for and so much more. It feels like someone found a lost episode of the original series and we are seeing it for the first time. The story is as good as any previous Trek adventure and most importantly it combines the elements that the best Trek always did. It is dramatic, exciting and funny. The cast is absolutely amazing. They are not imitating the original actors, but capturing what it was that made them work. Chris Pine is Captain Kirk. He plays the role with the same energy and swaggering demeanor that William Shatner did. Zachery Quinto, Karl Urban, and Simon Pegg are Leonard Nimoy, Deforest Kelly and James Doohan. The chemistry, the intensity, the collaboration… it is all there. Eric Bana plays the villain with perfect vengeance and is a true threat to the Universe.

There are moments in the story that will have you laughing, and then gasping. Events happen that shake you, because you care. How rare in the movies of today.

The visual design of the movie is exactly what serves the story. That is the biggest compliment. There is really nothing that is done for the sake of nodding at the camera. It all serves the story, which is a skewed reality of the Original series. What the screenwriters have done is what the best trek always did. It has placed the characters who work so well together in a new situation.

Leonard Nimoy is brilliant. His entrance is priceless. The music is brilliant, in fact I would dare say the best score to a trek movie next to WRATH OF KHAN. The action sequences are brilliant. I beamed as I watched Kirk and Spock side by side fighting off the bad guys with Phasers.

I can’t wait for more new adventures with my old friends. Thank you JJ Abrams and cast and crew for respecting the material and crafting a brilliant story. This is the Summer of Star Trek.

86. Brian - May 7, 2009

For all the naysayers saying that cannon was “raped and sodomized” (come on, really?) I have the following quote:

Here’s what Gene [Roddenberry] said in an interview just before he died in August 1991; somebody had asked him, ‘What’s going to become of Star Trek in the future?’ And he said that he hoped that some day some bright young thing would come along and do it again, bigger and better than he had ever done it. And he wished them well.
— Richard Arnold, Roddenberry’s assistant

This is exactly what Abrams did, he took it and made it bigger and better.

I think it was fitting that an alternate universe was created, that way you can do bigger and more meaningful things.

In the past ten Star Trek films, we may have received some tragic incidents (i.e. Spock dying, Data dying, Kirk dying) but to be honest, those things (well other than Kirk) have been reversed in either subsequent films or in the Countdown comics. However, this film dared to take a portion of the story’s universe away that can never be given back and that was the planet Vulcan and Amanda Greyson.

If this film had to stay within the lines of cannon, we would have gotten an ending that would have either negated the entire film we just saw, or tied everything back into a neat little package in a way that would be implausible.

I found this film to be funny, shocking, exciting, and tragic (all at different times of course). I liked the fact that this film was epic and took risks and, in my opinion (and seeming to be the prevailing opinion) it worked.

I feel this is the new life that Star Trek needed in order to get the respect from the masses it deserves. It was a lot of the fans who killed Trek by critizizing everything that didn’t fully match cannon, but if we keep a bit of an open mind to allow for good sorry telling, we can save Trek.

10/10

87. Dirty AT-AT - May 7, 2009

One thing this movie is awesome. The alternate time line thing throws canon people into a frenzy but oh well. This movie is worth seeing two or three more times. The actors nail the parts great while making them their own. The action is awesome and i lovethe scene where crew men olsen with the red suit goes with Kirk and Sulu and guess who isn’t comeing back lol. I belevie Trek is back with a vengence. But i feel a sequel to this is going to be hard to top. but I can’t wait for more.

The villian could have done more is my only complaint but its a very small complaint.

Very well done. wow, this movie may actually get me to buy the crappy palymates figures after all.

88. Wilson - May 7, 2009

I could not wait for Thursday May 7th to arrive. I dreaded the long hours at work and to top it all off I came down with a cold. But I would not let the droning on of complaining customers or the relentless attack of my sinuses spoil what was potentially the best movie of the summer and a movie who’s idea and story line I hold close to my personality. I’m so glad a team of writers, producers, actors, and directors brought back and more importantly brought life into such an iconic symbol as is the story of “Star Trek.” The movie revitalizes the aging franchise, I choose not to say “dying franchise” as some have because I actually enjoyed movies like First Contact and Nemesis. Every character in this movie is spot on, some characters exceed their talent ( this is very evident in Karl Urbans Dr. McCoy) Of course this is a movie for “movie people” and they might wonder why some “Trek Fans” chuckle a bit when we hear McCoy speak, or when Scotty desperately tries to hold the ship together but I assure the “movie fans” our Trekkers have such right. This film is non stop action from start to finish an unlike some action films who use the “action tactic” as a ploy to avoid the obvious holes in the story, Star Trek has a story that holds plenty of water. A tale not only of revenge but of conflict, a story not only of fear and terror but of heroism. JJ Abrams and crew find the perfect way to bring an obvious inexperienced crew together in the face of such odds. But one does not work without the other and this is true of the USS Enterprise. The writers have stayed very true to personifying the ship to hearts of the crew, a sovereign vessle, perhaps underestimated by the enemy and full of suprises. The villain Nero is played perfectly by Eric Bana, my interest in him peaked when he encountered the Enterprise and began hailing. His nonchalant attitude towards Captain Pike and genious. I was also impressed with how in some way you felt bad for Nero because of his past, a man who lost control of his mind and let his heart and revenge filled soul take over. It was also wonderful to see Leonard Nimoy on screen again. I cant count the years I’ve waited to see Spock again, a Spock of the wise and collected though it was interesting to see a much younger Spock in his more “emotionally conflicted” days (rightfully so). Go see this movie, take pictures with your friends and where a Star Trek shirt because I promise you that you will leave the theater waiting and wanting more.

89. dcm - May 7, 2009

I don’t wanna give a whole review but I will say, if you are a Star Trek fan this movie is a MUST SEE!!! I caught the 7pm IMAX showing here in NYC and everybody in the audience stood and clapped at the end! That to me is a sign of a EXCELLENT movie!!! The cast just had their parts NAILED, the plot WORKED and the CGI was AWESOME!!! Whatever your plans are this weekend make sure you it!!! I give it a SOLID 10!!!

90. Trekkie16 - May 7, 2009

I went and saw the movie a second time and it was better the second time around. There was so much you miss the first tme. This viewing, I was able to catch some of the detail that I had missed. I realized JJ and his team really did put a lot of thought into this movie and it does need to be viewed twice to fully appreciate it. My only gripe was Nero could have been a stronger villian.

By the end of the second viewing, I felt that these actors were Capt Kirk and Spock and Bone etc. I never thought after watching TOS as many times as I have since 1966, that anyone could fill their shoes but this cast did. Kudos to JJ and all the actors for taking a daunting task and making it work.

91. Denise de Arman - May 7, 2009

Spock and Uhura?! Did we really have to go there?! I mean, did we REALLY have to go there?

Aside from that, the film was everything I could have hoped for and more. I cried, I laughed, I wrung my hands in anxious fury… this movie took me through a rollercoaster ride of intense emotion and deposited me on the other side thoroughly depleted. Bravo to the writers and production team for this thrilling experience I intend to take advantage of time and again while it is in theatres, and again as soon as the DVD comes out.

All Hail Star Trek!

92. R. - May 7, 2009

7 out of 10

My fave Trek film is “First Contact.” (Which in my mind is a 9 out of 10)

Definitely left me wanting more. Felt too short. Maybe a little rushed. Had me wondering if there were huge chunks of scenes deleted to make the film shorter and placate the “newbies.” (UN-CUT VERSION ON DVD PLEASE!)

But, that only means people will want the sequel. This is good.

In that sense, this is akin to the first X-Men film. We were all blown away that a comic book movie could be so real, awesome, and tangible. But we were left feeling as thought the entire movie was just a set-up for something greater to come.

Same with this one. Can’t wait for the next movie, as it will be a ‘New Star Trek’ film proper.

FAVES:
– The entire Kelvin scenes. Most thrilling. Most emotional.
– McCoy
– Chekov
– Pike (He’s more badass than Robau.)

LAME:
– Spock Prime scenes didn’t feel as integral. Felt contrived.

– Why was the instigating incident not shown in real-time? Felt distanced from it because it was shown via mind-meld and holo-projection on the Narada.

– What is up with the cheesy “villain confesses-all” dialogue? Expected better from the writers. (Maybe blame it on the strike. They couldn’t do re-writes on set.)

– Unrealistic for all the main crew to be last-minute replacements. So unrealistic.

– Reveal of the Enterprise was totally uninspiring, although clearly it was meant to be. There was no beauty shot. Even the first wideshot of it didn’t contain the entire ship, but cut it off at the tail end, making the ship look weird and out of balance.

– Tyler Perry. Distracting as hell. He’s too famous as himself. I kept thinking, “That’s Tyler Perry. That’s Tyler Perry.”

WISHES
– Wish there was at least one shot where it makes you feel like you’re flying through space. With today’s tech and it being on IMAX i was expecting at least 5 seconds of such a shot.

93. Admiral Quinn - May 7, 2009

Just got home from the 7:00 showing and all the way home I just kept saying WOW! I am a huge fan of TOS and I absolutly love this movie and rate it a resounding 10. Fantastic story, awesome characters, great music and topped off with awesome performances from all…especially Leonard Nimoy. Can’t wait to see it again. WOW!

94. Shawn - May 7, 2009

I just saw the film about an hour ago. Here’s my review of Star Trek. A film the trek community has been waiting in many ways 40 years for. The story we all know already, so there’s no point in restating the obvious. The film is a prequel and a sequel. An origin tale and a continuation (for a certain character). The film has many strengths and a couple of weaknesses. Let’s start with the strengths:

The first thing that works is that finally filmmakers was given the resources to create Star Trek on a scale that is bigger than a TV show. This film is the biggest Star Trek movie in terms of production value. The Enterprise feels like a huge, massive ship with many levels, each with its own characteristics. The Narada feels and looks dangerous, just like a 24th CENTURY Romulan ship should be. I liked how the engineering room of the Enterprise actually felt and looked like an engineering room. The costumes, production design and, of course, the ILM visual effects were all amazing and top-notch. This is the best looking Star Trek movie for sure.

The second thing that works is the cast. I still miss Shatner, but not as much as I thought I would. These actors make these characters their own and I look forward to seeing where they take them. Pine has the swagger and confidence of Shatner, so that you can see that Pine’s Kirk will eventually become Shatner’s Kirk minus the Shatnerisms. The same pretty much across the board, although Quinto’s Spock feels more like a raging psychopath a lot of the time. For the first time ever, I was afraid of Spock. Nimoy is awesome as Spock, as if there was any surprise. I really loved the allusions to Shatner’s Kirk that Spock sprinkled through out the story. It was nice to know that Orci/Kurtzman and Abrams didn’t forget that and acknowledged it. Of the entire cast, Karl Urban I thought was the one channeling the original actor the most. The way he delivers his lines is almost a spot on DeForest Kelly, but that’s okay because we see that this Dr. McCoy is a broken man almost with nothing left, but his Bones. :)

I thought the action was pretty good with the opening action beat being easily the best and most emotional. I nearly was in tears by the time that sequence was over. The space dive was also pretty cool too along with Vulcan exploding.

Now onto the things that in my opinion worked, but not as good. The first is Nero, who is barely in the movie. Bana delivers a very interesting performance and I really wanted to see more of him, but we barely see him at all. I think the villain of the piece was weak and quite frankly, one of the biggest missed opportunities of the movie. I wanted to see him involved more in the plot. The way we are introduced to Nero is so awesome that I wanted to see more of him, but we didn’t get anything else. Bana has the acting chops, but they didn’t give him anything to do.

The time travel bit was a clever way of joining the two timelines together, but at times it was a little confusing to be honest and brought up several questions that were kind of gapping story holes like what was Nero doing for 25 years out in space and why didn’t other ships ever see him or the Narada. It wasn’t like he had a clocking device on and a ship that futuristic and big is hard to miss. Also, I thought Kirk being dropped on the same ice planet where Spock Prime was at was kind of way too convenient from a story perspective.

Also, the next thing that kind of bothered me was that there was not enough space battles between the Enterprise and The Narada. I wanted to see Kirk on the bridge battling Nero ala Kirk and Khan. I only counted two space battles with the opening space battle being the best. I was a little underwhelmed, to be honest, about the lack of the Enterprise being in space battles. It shows up near the end and fire off several phaser shots and torpedoes, but that’s pretty much it. Also, they could have hit the Enterprise with more torpedo blasts and caused more black fire damage to the hull, but I guess that could be something they could do in the next film.

Also, the final thing that I felt was that at times I felt like I was watching a pilot for a TV show, not in the scale of the production, but in terms of the story. I felt like Abrams and Orci/Kurtzman needed to get this one out of the way to get to the good stuff, which will be the next Star Trek film. I guess this is a good thing because this one kept me interested enough in wanting to know where we go from here.

Overall, I think this is the third best Star Trek movie out of the, now, eleven that have been made. It’s nowhere near as good as The Wrath of Khan, but not many things are. However, we finally got a fresh start and I want to see where the actors and the creative team take us from here. I give this movie a 7 out of 10.

95. Commodore Lurker - May 7, 2009

Decloaking . . .

Well, I’ve kept my mouth shut for a while; just got back from the flick.

I entered the theater ready to be blown away; I wasn’t.

The special effects were astonishing. Of course when that’s the best thing about a film, you’re in trouble.

The 10:00 show on opening night for prior Trek films has always been packed, in my experience. Tonight there were only about 30 people there with little audience reaction.

I give this film a solid C, at the top of the lower echelon of Trek films.

It was everything I’ve feared a Trek film would become: just a big action piece with little substance. The story was paper thin.

However, within that limited framework it was well executed.

I don’t think I’ll ever believe anyone ever again when they say: “It’s a great script,” because it wasn’t.

It was a standard Orci / Kurtzman script, as insubstantial as Transformers. However, given their superb success in the marketplace (for which I stand and salute them willingly), they clearly have their finger on the pulse of the vapid American movie going audience.

One wonders: would “City on the Edge of Forever,” “Mirror, Mirror,” “Doomsday Machine,” or “Menagerie” be made today given the inability of the American public to process thought provoking material?

I was most disappointed by the gratuitous use of Leonard Nimoy. He should have been the fulcrum around which the story was built, and honestly he really wasn’t.

In fact, the film didn’t have a pivot point. It seemed like an endless barrage of rapid fire imagery and action. Like MI: III, too much action. The film lacked quiet moments in which to breathe.

Quinto I found utterly unconvincing, just Skyler with pointed ears.

To me, the best performance was given by Bruce Greenwood, and again not used enough.

I found the lack of development on the Nero character disturbing and Eric Bana deserved more screen time.

Chris Pine worked as Kirk and the rest of the cast were adequate given the limited emotional range of the script.

Karl Urban was great as McCoy, and I liked how he got named Bones.

I was bugged by the repeated Trek film habit of unnecessarily killing off characters: Kahn, Spock, David Marcus, Kirk, Data, and now Amanda Grayson. I think keeping good characters alive makes a lot more sense in the development of sequels.

But, what do I know; I’ve never sold a script.

Star Trek did get a couple of good chuckles outta me.

The one thing I really hated was the lame ass excuse of Kirk’s solution of the Kobeashi Maru problem. I got the apple eating Easter egg, fine. But, that was the best they could do for a solution by one of the greatest tactical geniuses in Star Fleet history. COME ON!??!

Ultimately, this film would have been a lot worse in less capable hands.

The one thing that really didn’t cross my mind was Canon issues. And I am a reformed mega-canonist.

And frakk, I missed the Tribble!

Bottom line: STAR TREK LIVES, and for that I’m grateful.

I sincerely hope that for Star Trek 12, Orci and Kurtzman take their script writing boldly where they never gone before.

Recloaking. }:-D>

96. captaingoesdownwithship - May 7, 2009

First off saw it at 9:50pm showing. Second I’ll just say it before I begin my review I took my Mom and she wasn’t really into Star Trek and she actually really liked it so it is Mom approved. I loved it too and thought it was a good refit for the entire Star Trek series and a good way to keep the original timeline and the Nero timeline intact. It was also fast paced that kept it going, but I wanted more so definitely looking forward to the continuing missons. PS do a miniseries like there doing with doctor who for this season and you’ll have it made Paramount, ie can have the big movie budget and make a good story.

The opening sequence I thought was very good including the musical score as the Kelvin was being ripped to shreds. I thought George Kirk’s death was very good,as a Klingon would say he died with honor,including the talking to his wife till the end that brought a sadness moment but showing how fleeting life can be and then static.

Nero’s ship itself was cool and I wish too they did more of a backstory of the 25 years, but we know that had to be cut out due to timing. It was very sinister, but I wish we had more of nero and in the ending sequences had more of a ship to ship battle. The enterprise is recognizable yet different to me, but I actually like the new bridge better than even the 24th century ones and the TWOK bridges, but I got to remember 2009 and those were with less technology to make them look like this. I know some were like why make engineering look like a factory, but like any ship in the navy has there engineering sections looking like well the heart and the organs of the ship, which makes it run which also makes it believeable. The same goes with the viewscreen. I could believe this as reality of our future.

As far as story goes I liked it yet didn’t like the part about vulcan getting destroyed. I guess I’m setimental to the original timeline and having vulcan there, but will be a good story for comics on how th vulcans are dealing with this. I really did think when young Spock took the jellyfish that they were going to restore vulcan before the events had happened or if they did somehow save vulcan I think that could have a been a cool way to have the enterprise and nero go for a final showdown at planet earth. I know this shouldn’t be a big deal since in the original timeline Romulus is dead, but it’s the trekkie in me and I in general don’t take change too well on a magnitude of that level. I did like the backstories they used for Kirk and Spock which I feel did them justice and it’s never really implied, but I feel the riverside iowa ship yards is actually a tribute to George Kirk heroism in the face of his certain death.

As far as the casting I think it was spot on for the most part and I really like Pine as Kirk. He plays Kirk, but without the shatnerism. Bones well Karl Urban just was possessed by De Forest Kelley because it was spot on and Pegg as Scotty I feel was a good tribute to Doohan and yet brought out so much more. The rest I felt were really good and I like the new spock as Quinton puts Spock’s emotions out there more. Chekov I think is spot on as the eager young officer, but I feel the russian accent just needs to be toned down just a tiny bit.

All in all I feel it is a good start great new beginning for star trek as I feel the young generation which I am a part of will get into it again. PS I loved when they were on delta vega and they had tribble in that container purring.

97. cameron - May 7, 2009

just watched 11pm showing here in FL, loved it! there was only one Star Trek movie better. Acting, affects, story, all a 10+ for me

98. Leonel - May 7, 2009

I enjoyed the movie very much. I have mixed feelings about the time travel element yet appreciate that there was no magic reboot button. Lots of nods to all that has come before, I actually lost track. And dammit, I missed the tribble! Maybe it was hiding behind that baseball cap sitting in front of me at the movie theater..

Could’ve gone without a couple things, though. What do I know. I’m a computer geek, not a story writer!

It was great to see the Big E in action once again. I do confess, her reveal left me asking.. no, begging.. to be showcased a little more as in The Motion Picture. Regardless it was a highlight in this emotional roller coaster of a film. The music for that scene was just right.

There was another scene which left me utterly upset. I was unable to get that moment out of my head until literally minutes ago. While typing this up, quite suddenly thoughts of TNG’s “Sarek” episode put everything back into a certain perspective.

Final thought.. I wholeheartedly agree: Spock & Uhura? Really? That was a bit over the top..

Will I see Star Trek again in the movie theatre? Hmm. Is the Pope Catholic? ;-)

99. Leonel - May 7, 2009

Forgot my ranking, sorry. I’d have to say 9 out of 10.

100. DavidJ - May 7, 2009

Wow, don’t know about you guys, but I’m definitely going to have to see this one a second time before I can form a proper opinion on it.

I thought I was prepared for the changes, but there were just SO many new things to take in visually that I had trouble really focusing on and following the story.

Not only that, but the feel and RYTHYM is just so completely different from what I’m used to in Trek. That really threw me off too.

Still though, my main impression was that the designs and acting were superb (absolutely love Pine’s Kirk), and most of the plot works too. The only weak spot was Nero and the unnecessarily complicated time-travel backstory. I have no problem with the basic IDEA of it, but somehow the way it was explained in the movie was silly beyond belief (even with Nimoy explaining it).

Still though, I need to see the movie again to get a proper sense of the story and whether or not the movie as a whole works.

For now…. I’d give the movie a 7 out of 10 (TWOK, TSFS, TVH and FC still rate higher in my book).

101. RTC - May 7, 2009

On the 4-point scale, this gets 3.75 from me.

Excellent story, stunning effects, solid acting, wonderful score. Orci and Kurtzman really did come up with a terrific story that satisfies canon while setting the stage for new adventures. This story would have been impossible without the Treks that came before.

There were some really nice touches throughout the film that paid homage to previous Treks. The one I liked especially well was Kirk chomping an apple during the Kobyashi Maru test — exactly what he was doing in ‘Star Trek II’ when telling Saavik that he’d cheated on that very test.

What kept it from being perfect for me was mostly the pace. It was a bit too frantic. I wanted the story to slow down just a little bit, allow time for me to catch up, to assess what had happened and anticipate what might come next. It almost felt like the editor was trying to cram in everything to make the two-hour mark. Better if the film had gone an extra 15 minutes, or even just 10.

As did others, I disliked the Spock-Uhura romance. It seemed to fly in the face of everything Spock was supposedly trying to achieve. Almost felt like it was ‘just another thing to change’ rather than integral to the tale.

All in all, this film lived up to expectations. I’m already looking forward to the next Trek!

102. Justin - May 8, 2009

I wonder if all these people saw the same movie as me! The actors were dead ringers for the originals and did an excellent job with the script they were given but the story sucked.

One of my biggest problems was Chekov. He wasn’t introduced until the 2nd season of the original and I’m supposed to believe he’s there with these guys this early? I can perform basic math.

Am I also supposed to believe that Kirk landed the captain’s chair so quickly out of the academy?

Also the villain was underdeveloped. There were a lot of loose ends. It almost seemed like the story was secondary to making a big budget Star Trek movie with lost of flare. The smoke and mirrors didn’t fool me. It was a crappy story and they did the unthinkable.

In all I give it a 4 out of 10.

103. captaingoesdownwithship - May 8, 2009

After reading some of the reviews especially the one’s calling for boycott and suing Paramount. I’ll say like Shatner would say get a life. This is a movie. Yes I like canon and logic and don’t like change, like I stated before, especially the Vulcan part, but I’ll get over it. The old Star Trek was dying a slow and painful death. Yes I loved it, but it wasn’t mainstream enough anymore. The young kids these days grow up with anime and videogames that put the FX on older movies to shame. I grew up when GI Joes and Ghostbusters was cool. This movie puts it back into mainstream and many in this world like to think of things as plausible and this movie makes the ships and the world of star trek real. As far as product placement I’ve seen a lot worse in movies and going for real I’m sure after WWIII many of those companies started back up and produced cell phones and beer, you also got to remember that this era these characters and people weren’t too far off from our universe as shown with Star Trek:Enterprise.
Going along with this idea with all the seniorish cadets from starfleet going off to help with Vulcan is actually plausible. I remember early on in the TOS there weren’t that many ships out there when the Enterprise was built and the same goes for this and I’m sure some of the ships were out traveling and these ships in dock are probably the closest to Vulcan and probably didn’t have enough personnel to fully evacuate an entire planet if needed to be. Plus you got to think with the Kelvin getting its rear end handed to it probably made the Federation and Starfleet a little leary about the capabilites of there ships and probably spent a few years getting there shield and weapons technologies up to par. As far as training the cadets in that amount of time, yeah it goes pretty quick, but at the same time look how our universities are run you get 4 years to get your degree then your off in the real world. The same goes with Starfleet and who said how old Kirk and these cadets are, it sounds like Kirk is around 25 or so.
Sorry for going on this rant, but I wanted to be logical and give ideas that are plausible to what happened. Plus at the end it’s just a movie that shows Roddenberry’s dream in a brand new way.

104. Mr. Fanboy - May 8, 2009

Just returned from 10pm show at a local Ultrascreen theatre. I’m still trying to distill my thoughts after my initial viewing. On one hand, I recognize that this film is geared toward the uninitiated masses, and should be very successful based on the fast-paced action-oriented story and amazing special effects. It has so many positive qualities that have been lacking in Trek movies for so long. And I’m certainly looking forward to a sequel–which should be a foregone conclusion at this point.
Nevertheless, I’d must admit that I enjoyed the movie a lot less than I was expecting to. I had years to prepare to enjoy new actors step into those classic roles, and was even prepared to embrace the possibility that a reboot could work. But as much as an amazing spectacle it was, the story was truly weak, and relied more upon action and spectacle, than a coherent plot with recognizable characterizations. I simply wasn’t prepared for how contrived the central heart of the story was, and how liberally K+O mangled Star Trek lore to suit their particular whims. There simply isn’t enough space to list all the strange fanboy continuity problems, and throwaway sight gags,
I swear, I’ve never seen a Star Trek “Cliffs Notes” for sale, but one must exist. because where else could K+O gotten their understanding of Star Trek from? After watching their story play out, I have great trouble believing they’ve actually watched TOS at all, because their story has that same sense as a student writing a report on a book they never actually read. They have tons of isolated fanboy character & situational details, but practically missed the entire point of the story or comprehend the circumstances.
I went into the theatre mainly prepared to hate, or at least be disturbed by, some of the strange design choices, such as the Enterprise’s much maligned contemporary engineering interior. By most accounts, JJ made a tremendous mistake by using old manufacturing facilities and storage tanks to double as the futuristic Enterprise interior. Surprisingly, I found myself not so bothered by that. It wasn’t very “believable” to me, but it was so peripheral, it really didn’t matter. What did matter–and what I was less prepared for, was the total deconstruction and reinvention of the characters we know & love. While I didn’t mind Uhura becoming a more substantial and invested character, and also didn’t mind Chekov’s accent and portrayal as a boy genius, Many of the other changes were more than I could bear. By far the worst was turning Scotty into what appeared to be a comical “theoretical warp & transporter physicist” rather than the dedicated and proud engineer we certainly know. I don’t know when it was that Scotty turned into a clown (well yes, actually I do, it was ST:V) but there was no need to build upon that failed precedent. It’s possible to go on and on with complaints, but overall, I did like the movie, and I especially love the fact that it should still be a huge success.

Overall Rating: 6/10 (better than TSFS, not as good as FC)
Amazing special effects, with top notch cinematography and direction that successfully incorporates fast pacing. “Epic” story that suffers from superficial attempts at Trek continuity, nonsensical and contrived plot (on par with “Nemesis”) and more than a few instances of jarring editing seemingly omitting key sequences or linking scenes. A lot of stilted and grating dialog. Occasional inspired acting, but a lot of scenery chewing and some plainly awkward interactions (Spock sticking his tongue down Uhura’s throat on the transporter pad almost made me sick).

Hopefully Trek ’11 will build on this massive success by actually being a good story as well.

105. OR Coast Trekkie - May 8, 2009

Ok, went to the 7 pm showing here.

EPIC movie! Absoultely EPIC!

Yes, this IS a brand new Trek. Make no “bones” about it, lol. But you know what? It’s awesome!! I LOVE it! It’s a tabula rasa for Star Trek. It adds a new complexity to this whole new Trek universe.

As to a review… where to start…

To me, the movie just…worked. All of the actors nailed their characters. The humor moments worked with the characters because they were genuinely funny If you are not a fan, you found them to be funny. If you are a fan, they are even funnier.

The casting was absolutely brilliant. Each actor playing our Magnificient 7 made their character very familiar, yet, giving them their own take and their own life. Why not have a romance between Spock and Uhura? After all, it is a new Trek. However, I actually want to see Scotty, Uhura, Sulu and Checkov even more flushed out. Perhaps a future movie will concentrate on having to rescue Kirk, McCoy and Spock, and show more of the strengths of these other characters.

The special effects and action were absolutely awesome, and to me, absolutely necessary. I think the shaky camera makes everything MORE beleiveable. It really makes you feel like you are a part of the action. But yet, you do get some brief moments to catch your breath, such as when the Enterprise emerges from Titan. The element of silence in the space jump scene, and in the Kelvin battle scene, where you get the persepctive and feeling of being sucked into space was so awesome and so eerie. I was not bothered by the lens flares at all. In fact, I think they enhanced the movie. It was just the style.

The sets were absolutely awesome. I loved the bridge set. It felt real to me. The engineering set was great. Though we didn’t see much of “MAIN” engineering, hopefully, we’ll get more next time. So Trekkies can rest easy knowing that the water pipes were in Turbine Room 3 (if I remember the number correctly).

I do want to recognize a plot element that people have a problem with, and be able to justify them. First, a number of reviewers say that Kirk’s Corvette scene was unnecessary. On the contrary; it was incredibly necessary in order to address how troubled Kirk was, and to give context to Pike’s line about Kirk being a repeat offender.

I do have to admit to wondering how the Narada was able to just sort of chill out in the galaxy for 26 years.

I also have a justification for the touchy transporters (for those of you who wonder why they can lock onto Spock who is moving at impulse speeds in ship, but can’t lock onto Kirk, Sulu, or Amanda, who are only moving at Vulcan’s terminal velocity (and much less than that for Amanda): gravametric interference.

I will need to see this movie multiple times, in order to catch the things that I missed. And I will GLADLY see this movie multiple times.

NEW Star Trek: I embrace you.

106. Jack - May 8, 2009

#41 – to sound geeky, I understood that the (fictional) temporal prime directive applies to starfleet members travelling in time and changing the timeline…. Nero came through and messed the timeline up before Spock Prime did anything. Maybe in this new timeline, temporal investigations was never even founded. Or maybe there are things they can’t fix (too many variables). Let the details go and enjoy the ride — if we get a great movie and great storytelling out of it, well, then who cares. The future is unknown again, finally!

Oh, 8.75/10

107. Sputnik - May 8, 2009

As a long time trekker I was really looking forward to this movie. I even drove 250km to a cinema where the movie is shown in english, rather than the (awful) german dubbing.

Did the movie reach me expectations? Yes and no. While it is a fun movie with lots of great moments, awesome actors and neat special effects, there is also a downside: old Spock.

When old Spock appeared on the screen, the crowd applaused. You could sense the joy in almost every viewer. It was awesome. I’ve never experienced something like that (I mean in that scope) in a cinema before.

But what was he doing? Sitting in that ice cave, waiting for … yeah, what exactly? Why didn’t he go straight to that outpost to warn starfleet or the vulcans? Instead he stumbles upon Kirk, does some mind melding in then goes “Oh hey, there’s an outpost not far away, let’s go there, let’s see if we can still do something about that romulan guy”.
How lame is that? The godfather of logic stays in an ice cave instead of rescuing 6 billion vulcans.

Also annoying was Uhura. I mean, what was here role? Comforting male crew members? There were scenes where I almost wanted to cover my ears and eyes because I couldn’t stand it anymore.

The bright side: Pine, Quinto and Urban ARE Kirk, Spock and Bones. As I said, great performences by the actors but especially those three were awesome.

Many people ask “is this still Star Trek”? I think it is. It may be not so idealistic as it was 40 years ago. But it works for a 21st century audience. It still has something of a “good future outlook”, even though Vulcan has been destroyed and -as in previous Trek films- noone attempts to “rescue” the bad guys to get them to a court of justice but instead they kill him or whatever.

Bottom line: “It’s Star Trek, Jim. But not as we know it.”

108. Trekwebmaster - May 8, 2009

Here is my take of the characters:

KIRK: Pine was good with his rendition of Kirk. A little cocky, remembers this young Kirk is not as seasoned. Pine did a good job. What really picques my interest in this character is the knowledge gained in the mind meld. How will this affect Kirk? How will he decide to reveal this if necessary to others? I like this very much. Fascinating, indeed.

SPOCK: Quinto did remarkably well, this is a different Spock with new challenges facing him. Great source material for Quinto to truly PWN the role and step into “his own.” One challenged with dealing with self doubt and emotional outbursts with complications derived from knowing about his older self. Interesting to say the least.

SPOCK PRIME: Nimoy had alot of fun playing this role. His lines when talking to his younger version is one of which we all should heed. Learn to enjoy things more. There is a time for “canon” but also a time for entertainment and enjoying life. This is coming from a Spock who has lost everything, gained it all back, and ultimately, lost it all again. He still has his sense of humor. Says alot about humanity coming from a Vulcan, or as McCoy says: “A green-blooded hobgoblin.” A post-it note reminder that we would be better-off learning to accept things as they are, not as we would have them to be.

UHURA: Zoe works this role as a “don’t mess with me” Starfleet Security Special Ops officer. She takes her work seriously as Uhura. I would like to see more of how this officer progresses, what makes her who she is. Very promising role indeed.

SULU: I think the part where sulu forgets to disengage something to get the ship going is the only embarrasing moment we will ever see again from this officer. Cho does Sulu justice but again, I want to see more of this character.

CHEKOV: I thought the accent worked. It was very Russian, even I couldn’t understand some words he was saying, perhaps this is a challenge for him at his age? I thought this character was very believable.

SCOTTY: I am not sure of Scotty’s friend. I think I would promote that character off the ship into a deskjob at Starfleet. Kinda odd. LOL. Given time Simon will season ol’ Scotty up where we will be hearing that cursing Scotsman dashing from the bridge to the engine room to fix something that has gone awry, as usual.

PIKE: I think this is one of the most appealing characters in the film. What happens to Pike next. Is he permanently disabled or will he walk again? His promotion to Admiral was to me a tip-of-the-hat to the past 40 years. Much story could be developed for this character.

McCoy: Urban got him nailed. The young doctor recently divorced propelling him into service explains alot and is a nice expositionary statement that never seemed cliche. It was totally justified. I am very curious how McCoy develops from here. Nice job indeed.

Great job of setting up a storyline for the next sequel. I can imagine how much potential for great writing the reboot offers. There is so much more we can work with. You could even decide to utilize both timelines, if necessary. Avoiding cliche would be the most dangerous part of doing this, but if done with care and careful thought, it really can work.

Great job again. I’d say it was alot to fit into two hours. Easily this could have been a longer movie. I think JJ, Bob, and Alex respected canon, threw it out at the same time, and re-invented it better than Madonna, and made it work. Fresh eyes on a fanchise this old taking on the challenge of a tremendous reboot, whilst facing down rabid “canon” frenzied hardcore fans have proven they can successfully widen Star Trek’s appeal and entertain us at the same time. This is no easy feat to do, especially with a beloved franchise as this one is. I think they did it, and they did it WELL!

In a nutshell, I liked it, looked over things that really didn’t make a difference….who knows, those beer kegs with flashy lights could be antimatter storage pods or Scotty’s secret scotch micro brewery setup?

I enjoyed it…

109. Arcus - May 8, 2009

Wow… I am filled with some of the largest conflicts ever… SPOILERS if you haven’t seen it yet.

I’m 35 … I have pictures of Star Trek on TV in syndication in the background of me when I was 3. Tried to get my mom to take my brother and I to the Black Hole but it wasn’t playing so in 79 I saw ST:TMP instead at 6.

I have a long history and not just the movies and shows… the books do so much more for the relationships and storytelling of these characters…

I remember the anticipation of TNG, how can they make Trek without our heroes?

BTW, married 3 kids, I don’t dress up or act weird. I have an IT job and let’s face it people that don’t know how to use a computer are the minority now so let’s leave all the fan boy/geek comments out (let’s be real YOU’RE the one reading reviews on a message board about Star Trek).

And that’s why I’m torn… the movie was fantastic no question, I will see it again Monday… but what was the reason for screwing up the universe that much?

I can list all the plot holes and issues with this movie… but the movie was good enough that none of that mattered enough really.

I don’t mind a new relationship, casting was great, hell start over from scratch… it will just be a new imagining… but no they tied it to the old one for FEAR the fanbase wouldn’t like it… that was way worse.

Vulcan is kinda at the core of Star Trek… books, novels, comics… it’s gone in this version. And I do say version cuz this isn’t the other movies, it’s flat out it’s own animal. I’ll have to get used to it… but it is NOT the fanbase’s or Gene’s Star Trek.

Gene’s vision is that positivity and optimism win out that we’ll be all right.
This movie killed off 6 billion Vulcans that’s not a win the bastion of peace in the federation…. in the Star Trek universe, even this new one, destroying Earth would have been about the same… would people have thought it was Optimistic and Gene’s happy vision of the future then?

Even the ppl all over the internet saying, well it’s ok the Vulcan stuff will happen on their new colony…you don’t understand how much it changes.
Change can be ok, and it’s not that the movie isn’t good.. it just didn’t have to do it this way.

Spock is a child of two worlds…. split always in conflict… but that’s what makes him Spock. Not anymore, because we lost one of them… it’s too big an unnecessary change.

And even to those Trek fans who say stuff like well forget about it then the other timeline is ok. Nope, this movie wiped out the Romulan homeworld too. Less of a change sure, and they had an empire and more of their people survived, but it seems a bad movie to be a Vulanoid.

I liked the movie I did, and I know my wife liked it and it’s hard to get her to watch anything Trek so it has accomplished it’s goal.

It’s just hard to reconcile the overall story, that after all the life and death, the number of times the different crews over the years have saved the day that in the end… a freak accident of a spatial rift allowed a crappy mining ship to destroy a core world of the federation and take away Kirk’s childhood with his father, with technology Spock made in the first place.

Probably the only way to enjoy this is to let it go… it’s just a story…. so why did they have to bother to include the old stuff at all.. why not a complete reboot?

To those that say it needed something, it was dead without this, you know there was a phrase before there was an episode “All good things….” sometimes it’s better to end things than to force them to go on.

Only time will tell where this will go, everyone should go see it, it is still highly entertaining.

110. Thomas - May 8, 2009

I had the opportunity to see Star Trek this evening and would like to offer my thoughts on it. First, the showing I attended only had about two dozen people, including me. I arrived about an hour before the show, thinking I would have to wait in line. When I arrived at the window, the cashier said only ten tickets had been sold at that point. I was actually able to put my feet up and not bother a soul. It didn’t occur to me until after the movie that most people probably hadn’t known about these early screenings, so I wasn’t worried about the low attendance.

Anyway, getting to the movie. I have been anticipating it since I heard the first announcement on the radio three years ago. Even after seeing and reading spoilers, I still wasn’t quite sure what to expect. It really wasn’t until the last couple of days that I wondered if I was setting myself up to be disappointed. I am more than happy to say that it doesn’t disappoint. This movie hits all the right points a Trek movie needs to hit. The characters are pitch-perfect, so much so that I can’t even pick a favorite. Chris Pine nails Kirk while avoiding a Shatner caricature, a role that may have been the toughest to fill. It was very obvious that everyone involved loved what they were doing. The crew really gels together well; nobody feels like they don’t belong on that bridge. I also really enjoyed the designs of the Enterprise, inside and out. I liked the bridge designs, and I did enjoy Engineering. Yeah, it’s actually a brewery, big deal. It felt right to me, that was what mattered.

The movie moves along at a brisk pace, so while I have no big complaints, I would have liked to have seen more of Nero. I suspect that if I hadn’t read Countdown, I would have found him more lacking. Eric Bana is great as Nero, but he’s not given much to do. The movie is less about what Nero does than about how a group of people come together to respond to his threat.
Lastly, I have to give credit to Abrams and Co. for taking on a franchise that just about everyone had written off and infusing with a new energy and relevance that it so desparately needed. Also, I have to give them credit for not hitting the Reset Button, the biggest creative cheat in all of Trek.

Score: 9/10

111. hmich176 - May 8, 2009

Well, the wait is over! Finally after what…three years?

I suppose this will be brief. I’ve considered the movie now over several hours since it ended. It is possibly the best Star Trek film; I say possibly because it has certainly forced First Contact out of the Big 3 (what was Star Trek 2, 6, 8 is now Star Trek 2, 6, 11). With those three, I find it hard to decide between which one is better. Thus far, I love them all ST09 (which I refer as 11 often) included.

This movie exceeded my expectations. And I had high expectations. What I heard coming from Orci, I thought he was writing the kind of Star Trek I wanted to write. And that’s exactly what came across on screen.

This felt like TOS. Mannerisms of Kirk and Spock by the end pulled it all together. Yes, there were comedic moments, and it worked out. Kirk getting onto Enterprise was fun, and I enjoyed the Bones-Kirk relationship. By the way, Karl Urban as Bones is dead on. And Spock (prime) in the movie, FTW!

As for Nero, he is a good villain. I think some reviewers were expecting more from the character. But you know what? Not all historical villains are complex. Nero isn’t. He’s no Khan – he’s Nero. He’s a really pissed off guy who has the ability and intent to destroy the Federation, and ends up in a time where he can really do real damage.

I saw the bit where the captain of the Kelvin meets with Nero. I felt fear when I saw him board Nero’s ship, because I knew what was coming. You’d think knowing what was coming, I wouldn’t, but I did nonetheless. It’s great. And I really like the character.

I’d love to see Countdown turned into an animated cartoon a la the Clone Wars film that came out last year, or even a straight to DVD.

And I love the Jellyfish.

Summing it up, while not giving too much detail (I hope), this movie is great. I’d recommend it to anyone. It’s a solid story with solid characters, and awesome special effects – the best I’ve seen in a while. It’s great, and I couldn’t give it anything less than a complete 5 stars. There’s no weak points in the film that can’t be handled by the fact that this is sci-fi.

112. Sci-Fi Bri - May 8, 2009

good trek film, or BEST trek film? i’d give it an 11/10.

113. Dom - May 8, 2009

48. dave: ‘you are the target audience. non trekkies.’

And that makes you a ‘true fan’, does it? You see things have changed today and people like you who consider Star Trek an exclusive club will have gone from 2 per cent to 0.2 percent. Everything you have said has been referenced in my main review.

52. The Beezer: Interesting. What did I say that was so wrong? I simply replied with my tongue in my cheek. I don’t much like being told I’m not the target audience. I’m a Trek fan through and through! Who is anyone else to tell me I’m not? I’ve been reading James Blish Star Trek books since I was six, watched every TOS episode on their second and third run in the UK in the late 70s and 80s and still remember the disappointment of not getting into the cinema in Brighton to see TWOK in 1982. I suggest you read my review and think twice before telling anyone what they can or cannot type. And yes it was past my bedtime since I live in the UK and was posting at 2am. I was enthusiastic about the new film I’d just watched. Peace?

114. Neil - May 8, 2009

I’ve been what I would call a “hardcore Star Trek fan”, since I started watching it on WUTV Channel 29 in Buffalo back in the early 1970’s. I still have a small amount of Star Trek “geekery” left in my house, like the TOS blueprints and a bunch of the old James Blish novels, but my old AMT model kits have long disappeared.

I do, however, own every episode of every series and every movie done so far.

I left the theater last night feeling neither “slapped in the face”, nor “left out”. I know that means I’m not cool, but I thought it was not only a great movie, but a great Star Trek movie.

I left the theater having enjoyed myself so much, it felt like I was cheating on Bill Shatner. The review that suggests the center seat now *belongs* to Chris Pine is, in my opinion, dead on.

But again, I’m not going to obsess about how the tribble fur was half a micron thicker than TOS triibles, so I know I’m not cool enough to actually have an opinion.

I find it hilarious to think that supposedly, NOTHING of 21st-century Earth will make it into the future. Look around you – logos and advertising are EVERYWHERE. Why have some decreed that it won’t happen in Trek’s time? I found the Budweiser and Nokia references to be the FIRST time that Star Trek has EVER acknowledged that Earth had actual INDUSTRIES before Starfleet, and I found it to be an actual realistic grounding. But again, I’m not cool. We’ve been drinking Mount Gay Rum on this planet for 300 years, why can’t Budweiser make it that long? Is it because the “cool fans” are ignorant about the fact that SOME brands DO survive that long?

I guess if the Beastie Boys reference is “an abomination”, then humantity should immediately and forever dispense with Beethoven and Shakespeare, since the “cool fans” have decreed that no form of art or culture can possibly survive more than – what’s the rule? – a few decades?

Sorry. Rant over. I’m just tired of the canonistas claiming they speak for all the “true fans”, implying that if you’re not obsessed over the tiniest of details then your fandom is somehow inferior.

The ONLY thing I thought was wrong with this movie was how great it was. Because I seriously DID walk out feeling like I had cheated on the original cast. I tried long and hard to figure out what I didn’t like about this movie, and that was my only conclusion.

Among the funniest lines, by the way? “I’ve got your gun.”

Go. Trust that Leonard Nimoy knows more about Star Trek than a bunch of guys on a message board. Go. Enjoy it. Form your own conclusions. I know we live in an information overload age, where most of us are happy to let other people create our opinions FOR us, but follow Leonard’s advice and just go have fun.

115. Neil - May 8, 2009

9.5 – deducted half a point because it made me feel like I cheated on The Shat.

116. Lisa - May 8, 2009

I’ll give it a 6 out 10. I’m disappointed, but not as angry as I thought I’d be. You threw in enough details to appease those of us who were watching for details and when you changed something, it was clear that it was changed because of time travel. I thought the actor playing McCoy did a fine job. And there were moments for the others as well. I think Uhura was pretty good but the relationship you seemed to be trying to set up was aimed in the wrong direction. My main complaint though is that the plot was too comic book, especially the science involved, which sounded way more Superman than Star Trek. They’ve time traveled often enough that you could have come up with something more scientific. There were other things I wanted to mention, but I”m trying not to have spoilers in here for those who haven’t seen it yet.

117. Shaun B. - May 8, 2009

Saw the film yesterday at the London BFI Imax (my first time going there) and with my hand on my heart I can honestly say that this film far exceeded my expectations. Overall it was everything I had hoped for and more. This won’t be too spoilery a review, I am just going to say a few things. Firstly, for the first time ever I felt as if Uhura was a member of the crew. The screen time given to the character totals more time than she got in previous movies. She comes across a vibrant, intelligent, witty, warm and sensual character; think back to how Uhura was in the first season of TOS and thats right about where the character is now.

All of the main cast do a brilliant job with their characters, even if some don’t have enough screen time, but hopefully if a sequel does happen that will be rectified. Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto do an amazing job of carrying this movie with their interpretations of Kirk and Spock respectively; they are the Kirk and Spock we have come to cherish, but are different enough to make the characters new and exciting. And Leonard Nimoy conveys so much in so few scenes that I can completely understand why they brought him back.

But above all else, the thing that struck me the most about this film is just how much fun it was. The humour dotted throughout the film is amazing and, with the possible exception of a scene involving Kirk and Scotty in engineering, never feels out of place or forced. Karl Urban is not only scarily brilliant as Dr McCoy, but also hysterically funny; in fact all the main cast get a comedy moment that sits right with the characters they are portraying. One last note has to go to Bruce Greenwood. Captain Pike, I will admit, never really appealed to me. He wasn’t a character that intrigued me, I never wanted to find out who he really was…until now. Bruce Greenwood infuses Pike with a quality that, even as I write this, I find hard to say in words. Greenwood’s Pike is that person I guess a lot of people wish they had in their life; a person who is able to tell you that you have the potential to achieve more than you think, if you only try (that sounds corny as hell, its put much better in the film) and he is definitely a character I would like to see a lot more off.

J.J Abrams and the ‘Supreme Court’ have done a brilliant job with this film, I can now forgive them for the horror of delaying this film from Christmas. The film isn’t perfect; even at two hours long, the ending feels a little rushed (it just felt like the film was really getting started when it ended) and some of the ‘exposition’ scenes don’t really work, but all in all I see this film as being the beginning of something very special.

In 1992, when I was 12 years old, I came home from school one day, couldn’t find anything to watch on TV, so was channel surfing when I came across a very large, and at the time, very spectacular ship flying through space…that ship was The USS Enterprise NCC 1701-D and I was pretty much hooked from that point onward. I went on to follow the crews of the Enterprise, Deep Space Nine, Voyager and Enterprise NX-01 and did so with a joy that no other series/ franchise has given me, even when the shows, and the films, got…sidetracked shall we say. But now, I feel like that 12 year old boy again, hopeful for the future of Star Trek and what it may bring for us all.

Now where do I go to learn fencing?

10 out of 10 in my very humble opinion. A brilliant film, not the best film that bares the name Star Trek, but damn near the top of the that list!

118. Andre - May 8, 2009

An amazing, amazing movie!

I rank the Wrath of Khan as the most near perfect Star Trek film and this one shares that crown.

This is not a prequel but an alternate timeline. We have no idea what the next film will bring us and I look forward to them.

119. cpelc - May 8, 2009

The Kobyashi Maru test was great!

To me that’s where I saw Pine really remind me of Shatner. Sitting in his chair, casually giving orders with intense cockiness.

Overall great job! My audience was laughing(in a good way) the whole film.

120. Neil - May 8, 2009

^119

My audience SUCKED.
Went to the early show – first one in any theater for a hundred miles around – and not a Klingon in the joint. No andorians. No green chicks. And the line to get in was TEN PEOPLE LONG. The most imaginative thing in the whole crowd was the guy who was in front of me (he was first in line, I was second).

He was wearing a communicator-style insignia on his dress shirt.

Polite applause at the end. No cheering when we saw Nimoy. No cheering for ANYTHING, in fact.

Boring people, great movie.

121. Jim Durdan - May 8, 2009

I’ll be voyaging to see it again tonight. Every now and then last night I tried to remember to look for the cameos, especially Randy Paush. But I was so involved in the movie that I never did see him. I pretty much imagine I’ll be seeing this one 3 or 4 times.

122. Captainfirst - May 8, 2009

First off, I rate this an 8 out of 10. Not quite perfect but by far the best Trek movie ever (and I say this as a fan who’s been watching the original series since 1972 when I was six years old.) Karl Urban absolutely IS Leonard McCoy and the other actors are fine at playing their respective characters except for the one who played Sarek, I couldn’t quite “buy” him in the role.

I saw this at the AMC Theatre on 4th Street in San Francisco at the 1 a.m. showing, for which the theater was about 1/3 full (pretty amazing considering the time of day, I think). The 7 and 10 p.m. showings (both in regular format and the IMAX version) were already sold out when I went to get a ticket at 5 in the afternoon, so that’s a good sign.

Now to cover some of the details- (contains spoilers, some minor, and some major)

The ship- Frankly, I expected to hate the new design but it worked for me for the most part. The shot of the Enterprise rising through the rings of Titan gave me goosebumps.

The musical score- serviceable but nothing earth-shattering. I would have liked to see the opening fanfare of the original theme right at the start of the film but having it at the end worked okay.

Special Effects- damn good, as would be expected with work done from ILM.

Sound mix- As someone who has a background in doing this sort of thing for a living, I was just blown away by how well the sound was mixed.

The opening pre-title scenes aboard the U.S.S. Kelvin- epic. If a tv show is to come from this, let it be in that era with that ship and crew.

Pacing- a little too fast for my tastes but better too fast than too slow, says the man who even at the age of thirteen realized that ST:TMP dragged much too much.

“Easter” Eggs/nods to veteran fans- Loved the use of TMP-style uniform for Pike at the end of the movie. Also was nice to see the TMP concept of an officer’s medical readings being monitored at all times, and that someone’s death registers almost automatically on the ship’s systems. Loved the line where McCoy asks where Chapel is.

Things I’d like to see in an extended DVD cut and explained if possible-
more of Winona Ryder’s surprisingly good performance as Spock’s mother. Some sort of explanation as how to Spock Prime could witness events on Vulcan from Delta Vega- maybe Delta Vega is an asteroid in Vulcan’s solar system? Some explanation as to whether or not the boy Kirk passed while driving the car is indeed his older brother George, and if so, why wasn’t he aboard the Kelvin?

Now, let me say a few more things. First off, the whole film felt more like “The Cage” than “Where No Man Has Gone Before” and I think that sequels and novels set in this timeline should stick with that. Please keep in mind that I’m one of the few fans I know who has openly advocated a “reboot” for several years. As an experienced writer of fanfic, I am thrilled with the possibilities this movie sets up.

Please, for the sequel or sequels- let there be no use of Khan or the Borg or any other pre-existing characters- these movies should be new and fresh stories, not rehashes of things already seen on screen.

The destruction of Vulcan is a bold move I applaud. Novels both professional and fan-written should explore the effects this will have on what is left of Vulcan culture and society. I for one would love to see the Romulans make an offer to their long lost cousins of settling on Romulus- how many of the remaining 10,000 Vulcans would take it?

Also, the fact of Spock Prime being alive and well in his own past and working to establish a colony for the survivors- interesting idea that could be explored in fanfic but probably, IMHO, would be best left untouched in pro novels. I, for one, am very satisfied with the characters realizing that they are in an altered/alternate reality and that said new reality is left intact and the end of the movie.

In closing, let me say that I think this film is the first major alteration of what Star Trek is since “The Wrath Of Khan” came out in 1982. It’s a long overdue change, I think, and I hope that it sets up a new era of Trek being relevant again. For too long, filmmakers, fans, screenwriters and novelists have all approached Trek as one would behave in a sacred place of worship, where no one dare question what is or how it came to be. That approach served no one any good at all, I believe, and discarding it would serve us all quite well.

To the writers, director, producer, cast, and all others involved in the making of this film, I offer my heartfelt gratituded.

123. Jim - May 8, 2009

I saw ‘Star Trek’ last night at the 7:00 showing, and I feel the need to post two separate reviews for this movie (caution: SPOILERS)…

AS A MOVIE-GOER:
I must say that it stands a good chance of being the best movie this summer. It was full of non-stop action, was well acted, had the needed character development to make the story flow, and an ending truly befitting of a new Star Trek series. The only downsides to watching this movie were that it lacked majesty (could have used more than 5 seconds to introduce the new Enterprise – the only thing ST:TMP truly did right was show you how glorious the ship is) and that the Spock-Uhura relationship felt forced at times by the writers. The former may be rectified in the DVD release (I hope?), but the latter felt shoehorned into the plot by the writers. For this, I give Star Trek an 8.5/10 and as a movie goer I really want to see this movie again.

AS A STAR TREK FAN:
In addition to everything said above, I LOVED how they worked in references not only to the original series, but also to the TNG era (a Cardassian drink, anyone?). Scotty’s lines were perfectly timed and actually fit the plot, and Karl Urban IS Dr. Leonard McCoy. There was even a redshirt death! Engineer Olson (first reaction was “who?”) in a red shirts meets a very early demise on an away mission.

That being said, there are some things that bugged me:

1) New Stardates (the new system exists even in the TNG era apparantly) as Spock said that he came from Stardate 2387.
2) No Sam Kirk. Is the person we’re cheering for actually the person he’s supposed to be? I mean, I guess he is since the DOB (which was really unaltered by Nero) puts him to be 33 years old in 2266.
3) The Kobayashi Maru set-up. The Klingon Neutral Zone isn’t established until 2267, but since the Narada appeared near Klingon space, certain aspects of the timeline were apparantly accelerated.
4) Delta Vega being a ‘moon’ of Vulcan. I thought it was a mining colony at the edge of the galaxy near the Great Barrier.
5) Old Spock’s knowledge. Kirk *isn’t* supposed to be captain in 2258.
6) Engineer, the least functional area of the ship. The bridge is a 23rd century technology marvel, but the warp core is a bunch of tanks with radioactive symbols on them? Come on, seriously.

Finally, the big one:
7) ALTERNATE TIMELINE!?!?!?!? Ok, I get it that time travel was involved. That’s been the focus of lots of Star Trek plots, but in the end things always work out so that time resumes its normal course. Like in First Contact, things worked out normal, except that Cochrane would every now and then mumble drunkenly about robot zombies from outer space. That’s fine – it didn’t change the final result. But now that such drastic changes to the Trek timeline have occurred (i.e. Vulcan being destroyed), every Star Trek event we’ve come to love is now…gone. I couldn’t help but feel that the movie tried to rip away the last 20 years of me watching Star Trek. It’s one thing when a series uses time travel to erase the events of one episode – that’s only an hour or two of fandom, but we’re talking decades gone. For that reason, I am forced to say that I did not like this movie as a Star Trek fan. Rating: 4/10.

124. Captain Dunsel a.k.a. Roger Deem, Jacksonville, IL - May 8, 2009

Just for the record, Neil–my audience was the same but I was decked out in my TNG uniform (hey–it’s what I have!) and was proud to show the world was a true Star Trek fan does!

I am reminded of the first episode of TNG in 1987. I decided to watch and give it a chance but I was expecting to hate it. It couldn’t STAR TREK! I was taken almost immdiately when Data started irritating Picard by giving a dozen synonyms for the word snoop. And when they trotted De Kelley out later, I was hooked.

I attended this movie with an attitude that I EXPECTED to like it. I did. A lot!

The music, the quick cuts, that modern style is not for people of my generation but I know they must attract the current market to succeed so I accept that as a given. On the Star Trek front I have to say JJ and company got it exactly right.

And the cast was amazing! They each managed to nail the characters–not the actors who originated the parts. A good deal of the credit has to go to the writers who painted the landscape but the actors stepped up to the plate and knocked them out of the park.

I almost hate to single any of them out but for me Karl Urban and Chris Pine so reminded me of their characters. Quinto had the toughest assignment because Spock has changed so much over the years. His weaknesses, if you will, seemed out of line with the Spock we knew but it is far from it. Does anyone remember when Nimoy as Spock started to apologize to Kirk in the first episode because he has no alternatives to offer (there is one thing that changed over the years–there are ALWAYS possibilities!) Quinto was excellent.

My 12 year old son who has always hated Star Trek (he’s all Star Wars) liked it as well but did not understand why I thought lines like “green blooded Hobgoblin” were so funny. He’s never seen Bread and Circuses! The fact the movie pleased both of us is the surest sign of all that JJ and his team have done what they set out to do. He is a new convert and I, a 40-year veteran of Trek, absolutely loved it.

It is not the Star Trek of my youth. But it IS Star Trek and I applaud the achievement. Thanks, Mr. Abrams and all involved. You made my day!

125. New Horizon - May 8, 2009

80. dave – May 7, 2009
“66.
no you are not.”

lol That’s pretty pathetic. Time to grow up. You can hate it all you like, I don’t care. Doesn’t make you any less or more of a Trekkie in my eyes. Peace and long life sir.

126. Captain Dunsel a.k.a. Roger Deem, Jacksonville, IL - May 8, 2009

Ahhhggg. Forgot my ranking. Nothing will ever top TWOK and TVH for me but I still give it 10 out of ten for hitting the bullseye.

127. spiked canon - May 8, 2009

Epic-best action Trek yet

JJ: Too frantic buddy! You can’t tell what’s going on all the time. I still don’t feel like I’ve seen much of the interior of the ship.

JJ2: I know there were time restraints but I’m not sure you brought out the emotion of freakin Vulcan being destroyed!! It would’ve also helped to understand how Nero felt. This is the ONE thing that made it a very good movie but not a Great movie.

128. Doug L. - May 8, 2009

THIS REVIEW HAS IT ALL! ;)

THE GOOD:

-It was fun and set’s us up nicely for the next one with all the pieces in place.

-Chris Pine’s Kirk is played younger, brasher, and with a bit of a chip on his shoulder, explained via the alternate reality he grows up in. Nicely done.

-Comedy and Action all balance out organically and nicely (with exception of Scotty in a water duct, that was dumb)

-The effects were beyond incredible, though I wished they would have slowed down a few shots and really let us soaked up some moments without the frenetic Battlestar Galactica pace for just about EVERY effects shot.

THE PROBLEMS:

-While the comedy and action balanced out well, I feel they neglected strong character moments to ground the characters and relationships. (not to say there weren’t any, but they are generally short and heavy handed to get the message across quickly)

-The movie bounces too much, never really letting the emotional impact of some intense moments sink in. Remember the destruction of the Enterprise in Trek III? That sunk in.

-Too many plot devices conveniently drop everyone in place too easily. Not too mention, the entire crew of the Enterprise was randomly replaced with fresh out of the box cadets for what seemed no apparent reason.

– I read the prequel comic, but I feel the movie on its own doesn’t flesh out the motivation of the villian, beyond basically “stating” that he’s on a quest for revenge… again no real emotional impact here. Eric Bana (Nero) is disappointingly under utilized in what I feel would have been the best Trek Villian ever.

-Zachary Quinto needs to tone up, and his Spock just didn’t fully resonate with me (subjective, i know). The throw away relationship with Uhura doesn’t further any element of the story other than to provide a punchline between Kirk and Spock on the transporter platform. Spock Beaming down to the planet surface to save his mother and the council was an unnecessary scene to give Spock an emotional moment which I suppose the destruction of Vulcan alone wasn’t enough to produce.

-We never really get a feel for one of my favorite characters… The Enterprise. My personal gripe is that they changed it too much, but that aside, we didn’t have time to soak up the sets and establish it as the crew’s new home, and give it the screentime it deserved both inside and out.

MUSIC
Just wanted to chime in that the Score was great, but I feel modern cinema has lost the “Big Theme” I wanted one sweeping theme that I could remember and didn’t find it.

SUM IT UP –
6 out of 10. The actors are basically good, and in place. The effects were outstanding, The story was fine, the back story and pacing needed some help. I feel we’re ready for a round two, and I trust the franchise is in good hands.

Lastly, I’m surprised by the unadulterated early reviews simply raving about this movie. It was good, but i’m not sure it’s that good. It’s an impressive feat for Star Trek given where it’s been and I think it will do very well. But it’s far from perfect.

Doug L.

129. Andy - May 8, 2009

I loved this film as a fun cinematic summer romp and an impressive addition to the Star Trek catalog!

I only wish they had not used David Winter’s sets from “Space Mutiny” to represent the engineering section of the Enterprise. I felt like Tom Servo was in my ear whispering “Good! Back to the rusting septic system of this futuristic space ship!”

Otherwise, I am coming to terms with the fact that these are alternate characters from an alternate universe. It saddened me at first, but I am happy that we finally saw a Star Trek alternate universe episode without a reset button. The increadible losses that our heros suffered through this film are permanent and not to be undone. That’s how life works. They must move on and survive.

I pray that another film will come of this – the actors were too perfect for these parts and the production team was equally gifted! I just hope any sequels avoid using the genesis wave’s protomatter to bring back planet Vulcan along with George Kirk and Amanda.

You guys did a fantastic job and THANK YOU, MR. ABRAMS!!!!!!!!!!!

Andy Morgan

130. Luke Sutton ('The Tenth Doctor') - May 8, 2009

From start to finish, “Star Trek”, as it is simply known this time, is a fast-paced and character driven experience. Unlike almost every previous Star Trek film, it is accessible to a far wider audience than ever before as it introduces the concept and background to the fictional universe and does not bog the viewer down with technobable, bizarre plot devices or long scenes of unnecessary dialogue. However, some Trekkies and fans will have trouble accepting that what they know about the world of Trek is about to change…

Of course the big question is how does this Trek compare to the 40+ years of history and backstory that has made Star Trek something of a niche and geeky franchise? Well, the plot is excellent. This film tells the story of how Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, Dr. McCoy and the original crew of the USS Enterprise came together in the 23rd century, something we have never seen before. Despite it covering over twenty years of history within the first half an hour, this on it’s own isn’t exactly something uncommon in most other films, just unusual in a Star Trek picture, and the first indication that this will be a different experience. When everything has been set up, there is still much to tell and the Enterprise is sent flying through the galaxy to one place after another in a quest to stop time travelling Romulan bad guy, Nero from literally destroying the Federation, one world at a time. In fact, the time travel part of the storyline is probably the most confusing plot point for uninitiated viewers, although Kirk and Spock’s mind meld sequence does explain everything in pretty clear terms, setting up the climax. The plot jumps from a space battle, to an emotion driven scene with a character and back again in mere minutes, but despite this extremely fast pace, it all stays together. The audience knows what is happening for the full two hours. As a Star Trek fan, a ‘Trekker’ as I liked to be called, I found the most challenging part of watching the film to be how inconsistent it was with the forty years of Star Trek events that have come before. This ranged from the destruction of planet Vulcan, to the design of the Enterprise, to the death of some characters. The film cleverly tells us that it is set in an “alternate timeline”, thus negating any canon concerns, but all the same, as fans, we are rather enamored with the way things were. However, if you think about it, the aforementioned destruction of Vulcan is really the only big change in the timeline, and who is to say that the Enterprise won’t get a refit into its classic form before the time of the Original Series, or that Star Trek: The Next Generation and all that won’t still happen, just with slight changes in their history books? The writers have purposely left that open ended… This isn’t as major as disgruntled fans make it out to be, nor is it just Paramount Pictures milking money from a franchise using a film with flashy effects and bad story, as some closed-minded fans seem to think. In fact, I’m pleased at how much attention to detail and the past there actually IS!

The casting is spot on. Chris Pine is a young James T. Kirk with attitude who grows up and learns to mold his energy into something useful and special after being a delinquent all of his life. It is perhaps Spock’s upbringing on the planet Vulcan which is more interesting, however, as we see his emotions get the better of him on more than one occasion, especially at school. Ben Cross plays Sarek very well and there is just a hint of Mark Leonard in his performance as he speaks to his son about what it means to be a Vulcan. Zak Quinto’s adult Spock is so very much like Leonard Nimoy’s first performance back in the sixties, and Nimoy’s appearance in this film as Spock from the 24th century is much more than a cameo, with an important part to play. I was almost weeping when he turned to Kirk and proclaimed “I have been, and always shall be your friend.” Simon Pegg steals the show in the second half of the film, however, with exceptional comic timing and some classic Scotty moments. That is not to say that everyone else is serious, though, and each character has a sense of humour, even the Romulan villain, Nero, somewhat underdeveloped, yet so deadly he is almost underplayed by Australian actor Eric Bana. His line “Hi Chris, I’m Nero” is hilarious.

In terms of production values, this film easily contains the best computer generated imagery that we have ever seen in Star Trek, and it even beats ILM’s previous work in Star Wars Episode III. The USS Enterprise has never looked better, if re-designed, and the impressive battle scenes as well as planet surfaces really take the audience where they have never gone before. Sets and locations are many and varied: I am pleased that this film goes to so many different places although the new interior of the Enterprise is a bit hit or miss. Bridge, corridors and Transporter room are updated versions of the originals, but the engineering deck is merely a load of pipes and just doesn’t work very well as a believable part of the ship. Michael Giacchino’s score for the film fits perfectly with previous Trek movie soundtracks. You can certainly get a sense of the Original Series in it, and the theme is excellent, if somewhat overused throughout the film. The closing credits rendition of the original Trek tune is astounding. In fact the sound design in general is exactly as it is from the original series: the transporter hum, the bleeps on control panels and even the bridge ambiance has been kept but updated. Good stuff.

So all in all, what works?

-The casting and performance, especially Chris Pine, Zak Quinto & Simon Pegg.

-The visual effects and sound design.

-For the most part the plot, which contains everything Star Trek is, has been well written.

And what doesn’t?

-Trekkies will take some time to get used to this ‘alternate timeline’ idea.

-Nero as a character is not as developed as he could be. We need more on his background.

-The Narada, Nero’s ship is well designed, but far too similar to previous bad guy ships.

In conclusion, “Star Trek” is a very different film than what has come before, and some old-skool fans will take time to come to terms with that. But past Star Trek is the past, and this movie is a perfect re-invigoration of the original and its core themes and characters, yet very much NOT a re-set. At it’s heart, Star Trek is about optimism, hope and fun. This film has all of that. Plus some really cool space battles.

131. The Beezer - May 8, 2009

@104 Mr Fanboy

couldn’t have said it better myself sir!!

@Dom

Sorry mate, but to me you came off as a sardonic juvenile attacking anyone who didn’t share your views. Peace.

132. Captain_Paxo - May 8, 2009

I saw it last night at the 20.45 Empire Leicester Square London screening and went in tremendously hyped-up, over excited, and probably a little over-expectant! Nerds like us have been pouring over every last detail, scrap of gossip, image, remark, rumor about this movie for such a very long time it was little wonder that I found myself more than a little wound up as I sat down at the cinema. When you’re that excited about something, it’s very easy to be disappointed…..

I enjoyed this movie immensely. It was moving, visually spectacular, well-cast, well-acted, well directed. Too many goose-bump moments to count and I did find myself a little misty eyed at times. The feeling of legitimacy Abrams has spoken much about was delivered in spades – so exciting to see Trek painted on such a rich and epic canvas; the true spirit of Trek vividly depicted in a new and interesting way.

There were some disappointments. Forgive the cliche, but the film traveled at warp-speed throughout and would’ve benefited from a few less all-action and (to my mind) slightly gimmicky scenes – there was too much peril too much of the time. This in my opinion cheapened the ’set pieces’ and climax and prevented the film breathing philosophically or emotionally (a balance Meyer achieved so effectively in TWOK + TUC).

I tired slighty of the slapstick comedy. Glorious though it was to see Simon Pegg’s Scotty, I wanted to see more of him doing things seriously and not just for laughs; his Alien comedy companion was both excruciating and hilarious at the same time. The Enterprise water plant sequence is (almost) unforgivable though this is, of course, a Star Trek movie designed to appeal to the masses and I know my nephew’s going to love that one when I take him to see it tomorrow!

I couldn’t get excited about the score and wanted desperately to hear Courage’s Enterprise fanfare the first time we saw her (at least), though there were a few original-series goose-bump inducing Enterprise music ques there if you listened for them. Speaking of the Enterprise, she looks wonderful; an excellent hybrid of the TOS/Refit design…..

Anyway. Enough ramblings from me! I can’t wait to see the movie again. 8/10

133. THX-1138 - May 8, 2009

I posted this elsewhere as an answer to those who still feel as if they have been left behind by the new Trek movie or if the have had their childhoods you-know-whated:

Again I say:

For those who think that their childhood was raped I suggest you go check your DVD collection. Star Trek resides there. The Star Trek that we have now is the only one that was going to get made. Understand that the whole thing had to get revamped before Paramount was going to spend one penny on reviving the concept. When you take that into consideration, and when you listen to the conversation on the bridge where Spock explains just what is happening; that they are all in an alternate reality and that in the reality we are watching, their destinies are yet to be determined. So this movie was either going to happen this way or it wasn’t going to happen at all. Maybe I’m stupid and vapid or maybe I’m just lucky that I can accept this reality and look forward to the next movie which won’t be saddled with trying to explain the “McGuffin”. It will just be a Star Trek adventure. But a word of advice to the writers:
Don’t try to copy TWOK. Challenge yourself and make the antagonist something other than a madman bent on revenge. The Voyage Home did this quite successfully.

Speaking as someone who was there the last time on opening night Star Trek was reborn on the big screen (TMP), I can tell you that the feeling I had leaving the theater was much different. Back then I left with a feeling that I had just wasted my time and excitement on something that didn’t feel like Star Trek and didn’t give me much hope for a future story. Last night I left the theater feeling that I had been shown a fresh take on a story that I love. The characters worked for me. The visual changes didn’t turn me off as I thought they would (bar-code scanners-who knew?). And the S/U thing didn’t bug me too much outside of Spock being a bit too emotional over a girl. I guess in my head I always felt that Spock could care less for romance outside of getting some every 7 years. That’s why I always thought the K/S stuff was a bit silly. But to each their own.
And the visuals rocked. But is the bridge really that low on the dome? Interesting.

***SPOILERY***

(And for those who didn’t spot the tribble–it’s in a cage on the desk that Scotty is sleeping at when we first see him)

134. Dave - May 8, 2009

Welcome aboard Captain! Phasers on Stun! Beam me up Scotty!

I’ve been a fan of Star Trek since I first saw it in 1972 (give or take). I was 5 at the time and then – the stories, the heroes – it captured my attention and my heart and kept it through The Motion Picture, The Wrath of Khan (where the got it right) and on through all of the incarnations. That being said I don’t think I’ve ever felt as much … ambivalence? .. hmm … for any of the previous outings. They were separate. TOS movies, TNG, DS9, TNG movies and so on. This was … well I suppose I felt similar when a certain Ronald D. Moore “reignited” a certain 1970’s era television show and gave us a new appreciation for Toasters. With Star Trek – I’ve seen the promo’s, the trailers, the hype. Question was … could it deliver?

Yes yes yes with photon torpedoes and warp drive. In a lot of ways it’s the same Star Trek that I grew up with but in a lot of ways it’s not. It’s darker in some ways but the humour is certainly still there. The story was certainly very good – not completely plausible – what are the chances that they’ll all be there (the way they just happened to stumble into each other) in the course of Nero’s attack? That being said … it’s a movie and it’s Star Trek – it doesn’t need to be totally plausible.

The characters – the acting. Pine nailed it …. young, brash, not quite as full of himself as Shatner portrayed the character … but strong confident. Kirk. Quinto …. younger, emotional, flawed – in short a half human half vulcan young man still coming to terms with all that meant. Boom he got it. Urban and Pegg … McCoy & Scotty … these weren’t the characters we grew up with but … they where younger, different. Yet the same. Urban nailed it – very nicely done. Pegg – once he got rolling (you gotta watch the movie you’ll know what I mean – there be no spoilers here) – again a much younger Montgomery Scott. Saldana – Uhura … smokin’ … wow. A little different, a little tougher (ok a lot tougher) but …wow. Yelchin as Checkov …. boom. He’s got it. Very well done. John Cho as Sulu … I think his interpretation of Sulu diverged the most from the Sulu that I grew up with but new isn’t necessarily bad – strong performance, younger man younger character .. Sulu. Greenwood as Pike … it’s not the Star Trek that I grew up with but he certainly made that role his own (very smartly too). Nimoy …. some things change some things stay the same. He is Spock.

The effects are outstanding. Action fast – very fast. Having seen it at IMAX with the sound system and the big screen I felt like I was there in the middle of everything. Only comment re the IMAX – if you’re going to do that get there early enough to ensure that you’re not sitting in the very front row …

4 out of 4 stars, a worthy successor to all that is trek. Fast, funny, exciting and most certainly entertaining. Gonna see it again so I can pick up on some of the more subtle parts.

135. Dirk Diggler - May 8, 2009

View of a non-star trek fan-

It was a good movie in some respects. I thought the graphics/ sets etc. were incredible. the space scenes were spectacular. the cast on the whole were good as well.

Just thought the premise for the story was a bit weak. I mean man loses loved one in catastrophe so swears revenge on the galaxy has been done to death in star trek.

I also thought that when the old spock came into the movie lost an awful lot. Star Trek always feel that they have to pay respect to other incarnations of star trek to somehow get the approval of fans they include an old cast member from one of the series and I felt this movie didn’t need that. It should’ve tried to stand on it’s own two feet. I also think that by including the old spock some of the integrety of the spock character was lost. I think they also tried to squeeze a bit too much into the story too, and kind of had to squeeze in an awful lot because of the prescence of the old spock.

Anyway, I thought the resolution would involve a return to normal that somehow they would set things right and things would return to normal and perhaps they would pick up with the crew as they were in the original series ie. Kirk would have grown up normally as he did in the original series, spock would still have a mother etc. and then we would see them trekking accross the universe as normal with no acknowledgement that these events had happened, but didn’t happen (thought that might be a good way to lead into the events of the original series or just before it but no)

So what has happened instead is that we have witnessed the destruction of the Vulcan civilisation, the Romulan civilisation (in the future) – that’s a lot for a new Star Trek movie to do to Star Trek canon.

Plus there is also the point a friend brought up. Would Spock (or any of the remaining Vulcans) not make it their duty to seek out this Nero character (or his grandad or whatever) and kill him before he can cause any damage- while he is a lowly miner lets say. That would mean that this current reality they exist in, is doomed to failure- therefore it cannot exist. Similarly Spock would realise the errors that he made in calculations and would right the mistake he made (with the sun) before anything could happen- so therefore the events of the movie would not unfold.

Other than that- didn’t really like the doctor McCoy actor. He was basically trying to do an impression of DeForrest Kelley and is clearly a member of overactors annonymous. I mean McCoy was cynical and world weary after the events of his life- not straight out of the academy. Maybe he was but it just seemed a bit OTT.

And chekov- what can you say? Once again we see the USA-centric view of the future- only Americans will be in space in the future. Americans will be in command of all these spaceships and crew the majority of them. Everyone else will just have a hilarious accent and will be there for comic relief. Never mind that there will be blue and green people and people with strange lumps coming out of their heads onboard- a russian grappling with the english language will still be comedy gold in the future. And of course despite the numerous civilisations and hundreds of different languages- English will still be the dominant language- and if you cant master if- it’ll be a recipe for hilarity!

And this transporter idea that apparently Scotty came up with? Well I mean where’s the need for warp speed anymore? The enterprise was halfway across the galaxy and the two boys were beemed aboad no bother! What the hell was Captain Janeway doing all that time in the Delta Quadrant? Why didn’t she just transport home? What a load of balls.

Anyway that’s my view! Still wouldn’t say it was bad or anything but obviously any movie that has so many series and previous movies before it is gonna get a little extra scutiny.

Goodbye to the Romulans and Vulcans though- that was a bit of a shocker!

136. dave - May 8, 2009

125.

well said.

137. Neil - May 8, 2009

One added thought about the “emotional Spock”, for those who have trouble with it.

Watch “The Cage”. Watch Young Spock almost laughing as he holds the leaves of the plant that makes noise.

Then cut Quinto and the writers some slack. Apparently, according to canon, Young Spock didn’t have the whole “no emotion” thing quite nailed yet. So Quinto’s character, and his performance, are ABSOLUTELY consistent with canon.

138. spiked canon - May 8, 2009

I totally agree that the sequel should not have an over the top antagonist. I heard this after Nemesis when everyone was sick of the writing, but we need a Stephen King type of story. Some of the best Trek has been the wierd stuff. TNG best (or one of the best) was Inner Light. Who was the bad guy in that? nad as THX said, ST IV. I don’t know if I can handle another one like this Transformer Trek. It did it’s job, but let it be the last. please

139. Josh - May 8, 2009

I saw Star Trek yesterday at the 10pm showing. I am a college student at Penn State and I wasn’t sure how crowded the theater was going to be. Star Trek always had a stigma attached to it that you were a nerd…etc if you liked it. Walking into the theater I was pleasantly surprised that it was almost full. In minutes after I got there you couldn’t find an empty seat. I am a younger fan so I have only seen the next generation films in theaters and they were never sold out on opeining day so I think people were really more open to seeing this film.

The movie in my opinion was great. I was surprised at how much comedy was in the film. The only 2 scenes that really didn’t work for me was the corvette scene (which was cool but not that necessary) and the water tunnel scene. They just felt like filler.

The characters were spot on. Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and Karl Urban did a wonderful job. Leonard Nimoy did not miss a beat and was good as always as Mr. Spock. His introduction brought a tear to my eye when he said that Kirk would always be his friend. The only character that would need tweaking in the sequel would be Chekov, his accent was too much.

This movie is for Star Trek fans, but it really is accessible to non fans, and I hope more people get introduced to Star Trek. There are nods to fans, from the tribble in Scotty’s lab to the almost “The Motion Picture” Uniform that Pike was wearing at the end of the movie. I give the movie two thumbs up!

140. Doug L. - May 8, 2009

RE Post 128 – to compliment my critique… What would I do differently –

Regarding Plot –

I would have set the film up more like Generations, in which the opening sequence is time displaced… In this case we open in the future and witness the destruction of Romulus, the agony of Nero, the failure of Spock, give us just a hint of old 24th century Trek, before moving into the new timeline. This would have fleshed out a lot of the motivations, and grounded the “must have revenge” plot.

Vulcan certainly didn’t need to be destroyed, and has robbed us of potential future stories involving Vulcan.

Regarding Style –

I wish it had moved a little slower and as many (including myself) have stated, given the characters and audience time to soak in the emotional impact of big moments.

I wish also that we had just a little more closely maintained some stylistic cohesion with the original series.

I’m sure I’ll have more to comments as I digest this movie.

Doug L.

141. JT - May 8, 2009

When I first found out about this film I didn’t know if I’d be excited or not. Star Trek has become a pop culture icon and grown way beyond it’s cult status in the 60’s.

Since it first aired back in 1966 Star Trek has launched a successful movie franchise and given birth to four spin off series with each one of them giving the nod to their origins, my favourite being the crew of Deep Space Nine traveling back and inserting themselves into one of the classic episodes, interacting with a young William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy in a 30th anniversary special. Beyond TV and movies it’s generated billions on merchandise, grown a following bigger than anyone realises and inspired people to do incredible things with their lives. Don’t believe me? Google the name Dr Mae Jemison.

The last two spin offs, Voyager and the prequel Enterprise failed to impress most fans and casual viewers. They seemed lacking in something special, the humour was off, the stories rehashed and bland. Now, however, things are a little different…

JJ Abrams revival Star Trek movie received rave reviews all round and when I got an email asking me if I’d be interested in reviewing the film for BBC Radio Scotland’s movie cafe, well, it was the quickest I’ve ever said yes to anything. The hype for the film was unbelievable and being a fan I was just as excited as anyone. Where there’s hype there is often disappointment. But the more I learned the more anxious I was to see the reinvention of this sci fi classic. With Robert Ocri and Alex Kurtzman writing and JJ Abrams directing my high hopes were met with a wonderful film that had me in awe.

If you heard me on the radio I had twenty minutes between leaving the cinema and going on air and I was still stunned. There was so much to say and so little time to say it Needless to say – this movie lived up to the hype.

Lets get the geek stuff out of the way first…

Years ago my father told me that the Motion Picture hooked him as the scale inside the Enterprise opened his eyes to how huge and technical a beat it was. Dad, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet! I was apprehensive when I heard about that part of the ship being filmed on location but seeing it on screen was amazing. In harsh contrast to the small, safe environment of Next Generation or previous movies the film opens up the whole hull as one giant industrial area that you could see Richard O’Brian running around in whilst playing a harmonica. It took away some fantasy technology of the Enterprise and replaced it with something real and believable.

The shuttle bay visual was also some stunning CGI work, with the geeky twist of the shuttles mirroring the 60’s version, and the interiors were just as industrial looking as the Engineering hull which was superb. Above all that though we have the bridge, in an unfamilier place but seemingly with much easier access than before. The ‘Apple Store’ brightness of that set, and everything in the saucer, was a harsh contrast but also very nicely put together giving a nu-retro feel to the whole thing. Some of the superfans looking to hate the movie can’t quite grasp it’s new look but it successfuly brings a whole new image to the Enterprise finally taking it’s design into the 23rd century! And I have to say it looks far more stunning and functional on screen than in the released photos.

In the bigger picture the Enterprise looked amazing. While other ships seen just seemed to be patched together and a little ‘off’, the Big E looked spectacular from all angles. Ryan Church has done some wonderful work keeping it’s design elements and giving it a modern, yet retro, feel. Then we have the effect. Warp was how it should be. Zap! and she’s gone. Then just like that she appears out of nowhere into the middle of all the weckage Nero caused when she catches up with the fleet that went off to save Vulcan.

The new-look transporter beam was also stunning to see, as was every CGI element on screen from the touch screen panels around the bridge to the destruction of Vulcan itself which showed up in the trailers, shocking the fans.

The destruction of Vulcan is one of the key elements in the film and how this new continuity differs from the original. There have been concerns from both the angry fans and even the ones who didn’t care about scrapping Trek as we knew it but this wasn’t like Batman Begins. There was no comic book style retelling or re-imagining. They went out of their way to point out that this film was a parallel universe as much as it was the creation story of the infamous crew. It wasn’t as if they wiped the slate clean without mention of the old time line, key members of the crew pointed out the new line with Uhura even saying outright it was an alternate universe. But the best moment of it all was when Spock Prime told Kirk about the changes. In a very key moment to Kirk he asks if the other Jim Kirk, the man we’ve all seen for forty plus years, knew his father which took the idea of the alternate reality out of science fiction and very briefly into the heart of the movie.

That heart of the movie is James T Kirk taking his first few steps to being a legend.

The Kirk we’ve seen before was inspired to join Starfleet by his father George. In this film, however, George Kirk dies in the tremendous opening sequence. Standing in for his captain, George Kirk fights against the villain Nero losing his life in the line of duty to save his newborn son. Without a father figure in his life to inspire young Jimmy T, he goes off the rails until Captain Pike shows up to put him on the right path. With Pikes support Kirk starts to move his life in the right direction and the world of Star Trek starts to come together.

More importantly Pine didn’t Parody Shatner or try to mimic him too much. There was the odd moment of the old Kirk in there, a cheesy grin, slouching in the big chair, but Pine made the role his own and did a tremendous job.

I was genuinely shocked by Pines performance in the role. I hadn’t seen him in anything before and I couldn’t really find anything with significance of him when I learned he was taking the lead role. But he was perfect for this less matured, arrogant and rebellious young man. He played it all perfectly and better yet, the writing worked really well to show how Kirk’s impulsive personality would ensure that despite it being an alternate reality, he’d still find his place as a legend.

Zachary Quinto, best known as Heroes villain Sylar, played a stiff and conflicted Spock that had great chemistry against Pine’s version of Kirk. Already we can see that this Spock might accept his feelings more easily and get a little background on why he wanted to purge his human side. There are even a few fun moments where you can almost see Sylar peek through in the performance, particularly near the end after he’s learned to work with Kirk.

The supporting cast were equally as brilliant. Simon Pegg speaks Scottish slang better than I do and brought a lot of humour into the role of Scotty which was one of the elements which was missing of too low key in some previous films while Karl Urban… well, as soon as you see his first scene as Leonard McCoy he just takes the role and runs with it. The rest of the crew all have their moments in the film. Sulu and Chekov fill out their roles more than ever before whilst Uhura comes with a surprise or two behind that gorgeous smile. Then of course we have Leonard Nimoy reprising his role as Spock from the future who is justas superb as he’s always been.

Eric Bana’s portrayal of Nero was outstanding. You could see the hatred in his eyes and his will to kill everything, and his back story, while not just, is certainly a strong point for his character. His brief interaction with Bruce Greenwood’s Captain Pike was nice to see, going from a laugh from the audience at first to being a big evil bastard just as he was when he first shows up in the film.

The story itself didn’t seem too far off any previous Star Trek film. It looked and felt different, but at it’s core it was an adventure based around Trek and the pace of the film helpd portray the fact it was a crew under threat. It’s amazing what a big budget and running down some corridors can do. The writers made some brave choices, the boldest of which was killing off Vulcan and showing there was a new path to be followed, but those choices refreshed and updated a franchise dying from a concept worn out by Voyager and Enterprise, as well as the last two motion pictures. In this film we see the crew utilising their talents to come together and trust one another and if this is a success, which it’s likely to be, sets the stage for more.

While preserving and respecting what came before it, even a few nods and secret handshakes to the fans and lines drawn from pop culture that everyone can smirk at, JJ Abrams has succeeded in making the first truly widely appealing Star Trek movie. If you know whats came before it you’ll get a few extra laughs, if you’re a newbie to Trek this is a perfect introduction.

For all the worry and concern that this would be to Star Trek what Phantom Menace was to Star Wars, seeing it on the big screen would set fans minds at ease. What we have is a roller coaster ride, a blockbuster film based around the original Star Trek concept with action, adventure, comedy and most importantly heart.

This film has injected new life into the franchise and I look forward to seeing the crew boldly go… into a sequel.

142. Joanna McCoy - May 8, 2009

Sure, there were things that I did not like about the movie. But, I liked a lot more of the movie moments.

It’s a fictional universe. Canon-worshippers need to realize this basic fact, and get over the fact that this movie may just have kicked itself up to right underneath Wrath of Kahn and next to First Contact and Undiscovered Country.

Plot: 7/10
Character: 10/10
Effects: 10/10
Engine Room: 4/10
Bridge: 10/10
Villain: 7/10

Finally, Trek is approachable to the masses. Hopefully, they’ll go back to the Original episodes and see what it’s really all about.

And Bones is STILL my favorite. Urban rocks, and I need to write him a fan letter to express my thanks for chanelling DeForrest Kelley’s passion into this role.

I just wish they hadn’t had to have a 9/11-level event to start this franchise off like this. I’m still weeping at the thought of what happened.

143. Brian A - May 8, 2009

WOW… talk about Boldly Going… Let’s just erase the board and start all over with a whole different Star Trek universe.

That’s not necessarily a bad thing. I really liked the movie! I would give it a 9/10 for pure enjoyability. If you are an absolute purest and will tolerate nothing less than complete “canon” accuracy, take a pill and just enjoy it.

The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly:
Good – The characters. I know some people might argue, but I think the movie did a great job of portraying the personalities of the major characters in a young and “immature” manner. You can see how they could grow into the personalities we know and love in TOS. They aren’t exactly the same as TOS, and they should not be. How many of us older folks are exactly like we were in our teens and twenties? The classic lines from each are not just thrown in but fit into the story, and the audience loved them!

Good – The action, and the fact that even at some of the tensest moments they managed to throw in some humorous stuff.

Good – The special effects.

Good and Bad – The chance they took with radically changing things in the ST universe that we have been so used to. A dangerous move but on the whole I think it worked. It certainly opens up whole new possibilities for the future movies, maybe even bringing new life (and new civilizations) to the Star Trek saga. However, the time warp vehicle did sometimes seem as a general excuse to play footloose and fancy free with facts from the Star Trek “canon”. Who knows, maybe Robert April was an unfortunate casualty on the Kelvin? One goof is a situation before the any timeline gets affected… fans of the TOS know when Romulans were first encountered and actually seen.

Good and Bad – The Enterprise. It looked great on the outside, but deep down I think I really wanted it to be more like the original. I liked the nod to those who just love the ship… some great shots, such as the one over Titan. The inside, well… The looks of some things were contradictory and did not make much sense. The bridge looked ultra high tech, but engineering more like a WWII Russian tank factory. They just did not go together. Kind of like TNG meets Battlestar Galactica. It didn’t fit with the typical ST pattern of how things look, but then again I can say from experience that bridges and engineering rooms of U.S. Navy ships can look like they are from different worlds. Also, the Enterprise bridge did not seem much like home, if you know what I mean.

Bad – Uhura. Probably the biggest character departure from the original, but then again it is a new timeline with different possibilities. It was disappointing for me, because I could not keep thinking that the things she did in the movie would have been so much better if they had come from a young nurse Chapel.

Good – The recognition of many of the classic Trek quirks. Come on, we all know what happens to red shirts on away missions. Of course there is also the long held Star Fleet tradition of sending the highest ranking officers into the teeth of imminent danger. I also appreciated the fact that did not try to make a radical departure in the uniforms: remember those leotard pajamas in ST:TMP?

Bad – (big spoiler)
Like others have commented, the big jump from cadet to captain is just plain stupid. Since I am in the Navy, for me this really reached the pinnacle of the ridiculous. You don’t finish from an “academy” with the knowledge or experience to be in a position like that, rather you spend your career preparing for such. The lower ranks are post-graduate education years for leadership. Kind of gave me a letdown at the end.

Ugly – That guy in the bar.

It is certainly a movie I will want to see many times, which is not something I can say about the last few. Besides, I have to find out where the tribble makes a cameo!

144. Dom - May 8, 2009

131 Beezer.

I wrote a lengthy reply before which seems to have disappeared as things are wont to do on this site! Grrr!

Anyway, it’s cool. Sometimes on discussion boards things don’t read the way they are intended to. Plus I’d hit the Aldebaran Whisky in celebration!

I said quite a few other things (all friendly and complimentary, I assure you) but I can’t remember them all!

Cheers, Dom :)

145. aliotsy - May 8, 2009

9/10

I’ll try not to rehash too much of what I’m sure others have covered here.

This would be a 10 out of 10 were it not for the canon-destroying event with Vulcan. I’m someone who usually could not care less about canon if it gets in the way of a good story. I’m pragmatic enough, too, to understand it would take something huge to disrupt the in-universe timeline and clear the slate to allow a new cast to determine their own destiny, as Spock put it. But still, the destruction of Vulcan and near-annihilation of the Vulcans disrupts so much across all the series and films. I’m really not a huge Star Trek fan; my first view of Vulcan was only a few months ago when I saw Star Trek IV for the first time. Nonetheless, it left a lump in my throat.

Something that was far more memorable than I would have expected before seeing the film was the sound design. I suppose I should expect nothing less from Ben Burtt. It really stunned me how effective the film is with the ABSENCE of sound to enhance drama: the destruction of the Kelvin and the orbital jump to the drilling platform stand out. And the new throaty rumble of engines as the fleet jumped to warp actually stood out to me more than the first view of the space station and the Enterprise.

The scene in which George Kirk shares his first and last moments with his newborn son is what lingers most for me nearly a half day later. Childbirth is a very joyous and peculiar human moment, at once profoundly unique yet common to everyone, and JJ Abrams also filled it with grief and inspiration and hope. I started getting wet-eyed, so I looked over at my wife, and she looked back, and she had tears in her eyes, too. So I squeezed her hand and held her close.

And that was only 10 minutes into the movie.

146. BenAvery - May 8, 2009

The depth of meaning behind the Star Trek movie comes not from the philosophy spouted off by characters and not from the sci-fi allegory, but instead as a work of metafiction.

This movie is about how Kirk, Spock, et al BELONG together.

Generations (Kirk & Checkov), Unification (Spock), Encounter at Farpoint (McCoy), Undiscovered Country (Sulu),and Relics (Scotty) all serve to fragment the crew away from each other. Spock is alone on Romulus. Scotty is alone in that shuttlecraft. McCoy is alone in his old age. Kirk dies “alone”. Sulu leaves Enterprise behind. Etc.

In other ways, this movie feels somewhat like a continuation of Spock’s story. In this movie, Spock gets to inadvertently cause two of his closest friends to avoid a terrible fate (Kirk’s bridge death — I also figured he’d die on the bridge, just not THAT kind of bridge; Pike’s quadriplegic fate). A single line could be drawn across many episodes of Star Trek, as if it were building up to Prime Spock’s actions in this new movie. It’s as if those episodes were LEADING, purposely, to this movie. It’s a stretch, but not much of one, and it’s a credit to the screenwriters. (Cage to Balance of Terror to City on the Edge of Forever to Yesteryear to TOS-era movies (sans Final Frontier :) ) to Unification to Nemesis to . . . Star Trek ’09 — there’s other things I’d put on the list, but this is the broad strokes version.)

I really enjoyed myself at the movie. A friend, who is no fan of Trek, really enjoyed it. The Onion video is one of those “it’s funny because it’s true” kind of things. This movie will NOT appeal to a LOT of Trek fans. But it WILL appeal to others.

There’s a third thing this film does, does well, and has to do. It’s a set up film. Other people have said it. This movie is like Batman Begins or Casino Royale. It’s a set up for the next film. All teh backstory is out of the way, the actors have slide into the characters, now . . . the REAL adventure can begin!

Here’s hoping Star Trek version 2 part II will be an awesome, BIG exploration of strange new worlds!!!

147. Snowy Brighton - May 8, 2009

*Contains One Spoiler At End*

Ok, so I booked my tickets at the BFI IMAX in London on the day they went on sale. Now it being the first time I ventured anywhere near an IMAX (let alone the biggest one in the UK), I wasn’t sure what to expect.

Like every other review I have read and future ones I am likely to read, the film starts off in Warp 9 and certainly “boldly goes where no man has gone before”. The pace continues throughout the two hour long film and not once did I check my watch to see how long has passed or how long is left.

J.J Abrams picked the perfect cast with both Pine and Quinto as the leads, both complimenting each other making me laugh and hold my breath (although not at the same time, because that would be illogical).

Finally, Uhura is given the credit she deserves as Communications officer and Saldana keeps her sassy and sexy just like Roddenberry intended her to be. Unfortunately Pegg wasn’t nearly seen on-screen enough BUT the time he was, he did steal the scene on every occasion.
Bana was great as Nero, however, this Star Trek film wasn’t about the ‘bad guy’ but more about how Spock and Kirk begin a friendship through rivalry and admiration for each other.

The IMAX Experience was fantastic and I was blown away by the sheer size of the screen and the many speakers around the auditorium blasting out every hum of the warp drive and beeping of the sensors. However, it was the score that really was the cherry on top of this very yummy ice-cream sundae that is/was Star Trek.

After 18 months of waiting, I wasn’t disappointed in the slightest and my hat goes off to Mr. Abrams for he certainly did create a spectacular “reboot” of the Star Trek franchise.

*The first time I saw it, 9.5/10 the second time (after I saw the tribble) it went up to 10/10*

148. Konrad - May 8, 2009

Well..all I have to say is, if you liked the new Battlestar Galactica and were able to wrap your head around the whole “re-imagining” thing, then you’ll LOVE this movie.

If you are walking into Star Trek expecting a 31 year Bill Shatner and gang to walk right out of the 60’s TV show then you’ll be disappointed. What you have to do is imagine not ever having seen Star Trek before. You almost have to wipe the slate clean (as hard as that is!) and just keep an open mind with no expectations. Easier said than done I know, but that basically captures the spirit of what I did last night.

I’m not going to get into all the nitty gritty, but I will say that the movie hit the mark. The characters did indeed capture the spirit of the originals without becoming walking, talking imitations. The original chemistry was clearly evident and it felt natural…which is no mean feat as you can imagine.

That’s what blew me away and stayed with me long after the movie was over..and Carl Urbane as “Bones” was a revelation! All the characters really held up and brought their own personalities to the fold without resorting to imitation. The cast paid tribute to those that came before but kept it fresh..once again no mean feat..

I say go see Star Trek with an open mind and enjoy it for what it is..a fresh start with all the old familiar trappings that made Star Trek as great as it was back in the day..

149. vorta23492392932939230 - May 8, 2009

I just don’t know if I like the idea of a world in which Vulcan is gone and Vulcans are an endangered species… seems like it wasn’t neccesary to tell this story, or to re-boo the franchise… that felt like losing an old friend and didn’t make me too happy…

But beyond that everything was done so well, with a few minor nit picks (also, now Pike doesn’t get to Talos IV, doesn’t get in his accident, and most of all doesn’t really get to build a relationship with Spock — as it does seem that since this is the first ‘maiden voyage’ of the USS Enterprise NCC 1701, as Pike says in the film, he and Spock did not get to serve together very long.

Also a little too convenient was finding Spock Prime, finding Scotty and then suddenly he’s the ship’s engineer, and then of course Kirk immediately becoming Captain of the flagship…

Also since I’m nit-picking, how does Starfleet know that Romulans and Vulcans are related species or close? Did that also happen when Nero came out of the time-vortex? If so, fine, but we didn’t hear that and Spock just reports the similarity as if is common knowledge.

I’m all for a re-make, up-date, even a total re-boot, but why ignore the storytelling that’s come before when its so much stronger than these alternatives? Its like deciding to paint a picture but only use two colors. Great for an exercise but it felt like a mistake to ignore such available resources (much more important it seems to me than if the ship looked the same or not, or the sound effects were the same).

Anyway, I really hoped to love this movie with all my heart but instead I can just respect it but also feel a little let down… once again Hollywood has made the expedient commercial choice over the perhaps more integral artistic one. So be it. Bring on Star Trek 2.

150. James Kirk's Unknown Son - May 8, 2009

#141 (JT) – hell of a review, dude. Your take and mine are in total sync.

151. Dennis - May 8, 2009

By making this new Star Trek in a true altered history, Abrams can now go in any direction with ease. While there were a couple of things that I still do not get (HE kissed HER?!?) The fact that this universe is greatly different from the one I grew up with is just fine by me.

One thing that bothered me was the sheer size of the engineering spaces. My son, however, put it best. This Enterprise is bigger than the original. Oh. Duh. It is, isn’t it!

My son also said something that made me laugh… he said “This is MY Star Trek!” That may be, but that old vulcan there is MY Spock!

It’s a good movie. It stands on it’s own, but if you know the history, if you lived the history, you will smile and nod and laugh even more.

I look forward to exploring this new timeline. Watching it unfold in ways that can be somewhat familiar, but yet different as well.

I give it a 10. It was worth the money, and I’ll buy the DVD.

152. Robert Gillis - May 8, 2009

I am loving the various, varied and intelligent posts. Many have said, “Don’t have time to read them all.” Make the time, definitely worth it.

Also, would love to see a new post for the easter-eggs, in-jokes, cameos, etc. Anthony, can you set that up? Where was Cawley, did anyone else recognize Greg on the car phone, etc…

153. Explorer - May 8, 2009

May 8th 2009 – 15h00

(No major spoilers…)

Just got out of the theatre and let just say it will need a get use to. This new beginning is in deed a complete reboot of the franchise. Forget what we know of canon from the moment Neron arrives from the future. It’s an entirely new timeline, but opens up the franchise to new stories, new possibilities. Creating this new timeline avoids any conflict with canon from TOS to Nemesis. It’s a new beginning indeed. Can’t wait for the next one.

Many comments are already posted and I will refrain from just repeating the same things. JJ has done a fantastic job with this reboot. The only reservation that I could point out is that he went a bit to far in regards to giving realism to the ships, outpost, shuttles… I am not saying that it ‘s all bad, but he just missed some areas here and there. For example the engine rooms, it’s to much like what we could expect to see in our days. It’s way too much mechanical, for example, manual valves? I would think that they would all use automated ones by then. Again, those strange detail doesn’t mean this film is not good, in the contrary, it’s one of the best ones. I will definitely go see this film another time.

Story/plot = 9/10
Acting = 10/10
SFX = 10/10
Design = 8/10

I give it an overall 9+

154. Chris Dawson - May 8, 2009

Hey wait a minute – in Star Trek Of God’s and Men WE went into an alternate universe, affected the timeline (centered around Kirk – or lack of), destroyed Vulcan, and saw a somewhat different Enterprise, but in the end, everything went back to normal . . . .

Oh well, that is a another life . . .

I thought that this movie ROCKED BIG TIME!!
I was hesitant at first, excited near release date then totally awed when I saw it last night.

I totally think that this film was a clever attempt to re-invigorate the franchise, successfully I think, and stay true to canon for those of us who love and need it. Just totally clever and satisfying (for me) way to go.

Some things I would have wished were different like the ship design both internal and external (to me the interior of the local brewing plant was very obvious and just didn’t quite fit – would have worked very well for the interior of say, the mining plant on Delta Vega). But minor at most.

Characterization A+. From the opening act, I really CARED about these guys and had a tear in my eye many times.

Great introduction of Leonard Nimoy too, and every scene with him shined! Very touching at the end, with younger Spock and in the Academy. Another tear moment.

On a personal note about the state of America right now, I fully appreciate that this film was shot in the United States (American company/money/manufacturing skills belong in America as long as there are Americans needing that work) and in Los Angeles. As a film industry professional I have seen close just how “outsourcing” has hurt our economy and who pays the price and for how long. Also glad to see that the midwest in the future hasn’t lost all manufacturing jobs!!

So for many reasons I really appreciated this film and enjoyed it immensely. Expecting to see it many times.

STAR TREK LIVES! Indeed!

155. P Technobabble - May 8, 2009

The new Star Trek film is fabulous, in every aspect of it. The cast is outstanding. The FX were stunning. The story was pure Star Trek. This is the MOVIE version of Star Trek that all future Treks will be compared to. It truly was a roller-coaster of a ride. I went from shedding tears, to clenching fists, to laughing to clenching fists, to tears… it was thrilling. The character development was extraordinarily well done, and I found myself caring about Kirk and Spock the way I did when I was a kid.
To JJ, Bob & Alex, and the rest of the team: THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!

156. lwr - May 8, 2009

okay…
I first have to say that i have been waiting since 1979 for a REAL STAR TREK movie.
one with scope.
one with budget.
one that was more than an extended TV show or a re mix of special effects from prior movies with a few new ones tossed in for good measure.

well as Nero would say, the wait is over…
but i do i still feel wanting?

i enjoyed the movie imensly, but i walked out of the theater this afternoon feeling like there should have been more, that something was not what i had been expecting, that someting just got LOST.

I had noproblem with the ship,the effects,the actors, and most of the story.
i did not give a hoot about cannon,because i as I stated once long ago..tossme out a few lines of mush toexplain it all and i will be fine.
well they did that ,too.
i had fun, i got a little teary eyed, and i really had a good time
so with all that being said .. what is wrong with me and this film?

well i can pin it on 4 things:
1. half of the music
2. the camara set ups.
3. no opening credits
4. leonard nimoy

first the music:

I HATED THE BAD GUY MUSIC. it stunk.i mean batman forever stink.
the good guy music was great, but nero’sstuff really wws crummy. also, i did not like the way A.C.’s them was tossed at the end. i wanted it there, but i wanted it melded in with the cool music that was kirk’s theme. like they did in Superman returns.a little bit of williams meshed in with the new stuff.
not courage over and over and over and over.
(i could not get those damn roddenberry lyrics out of my head!)

2.the camera set ups:

with all the money tossed into these ssts and locations..why all the closeups? I wanted Speilbrgian vista’s that closed in on the actors.
I wanted size and scope.

not every shot had to be seemingly be in our hero’s faces.
and what was up with all that glare??

3. i really missed real opening credits. that makes a picture epic to me.
it is where the theme music sets the tone. i missed that in batman- the dark knight,and i miss it here.

4. mr nimoy. he was great. i wanted to cry. but i wanted more. i wanted him to have a point.I wanted him to be the hero. iiwanted him to make the sacrifice” the needs of the many outweigh the needsof the few.. or the one” type thing. i wanted him to be the one that made Jim Kirk into Captain James T. kirk. by giving himself for the future of not only the Universe, but his friend. the final sacrifice for destiny.

I still give this movie a solid 8/10.

but I guess that is what i am missing.

i thought this time it would be a pefect 10.

i guess even in star trek, nobody can be perfect.
just have to settle for pretty darn good.

157. lwr - May 8, 2009

oh and one more thing…
would it have killed them to use Shatners’ ” Space th Final frontier…”from the TV show?

that would have been the heart tug for the ages.

158. JessIAm - May 8, 2009

I enjoyed this movie thoroughly. I had accidentally read spoilers, and knew the plot already. Nonetheless this movie had me on the edge of my seat. I’m planning on going again at least once.

All the characters were done very well by the cast.
Karl Urban isn’t Deforest Kelly, but his take on Dr McCoy is spot on. I’m looking forward to see him interact with other characters in the next movie.

I enjoyed Anton Yelchin’s Checkov as much as I enjoyed Walter Keonig’s. Oh, BTW, Checkov has plot points in this movie that don’t involve the “Checkov Treatment.” Yelchin didn’t have to cry out in pain once! Nice change, in my opinion.

John Cho’s Sulu was believable. I liked his vulnerability on the bridge. When facing off against the Romulans, he came across as a force to be reckoned with.

Simon Pegg’s Scotty seemed little whiney at first, but it made sense in the story (he was marooned on that planet for months on end without human company – that would drive anyone crazy).

Zoe Saldana plays an intelligent, sophisticated Uhura. Nichelle Nichols Uhura was as much as she could be in the 60’s (a woman who is an officer on the bridge of any ship was unheard of until Star Trek). Now Uhura is a force to be reckoned with.

Zachary Quinto’s Spock was believable. But I expected more of the struggle with his emotions to show on his face. That’s my only complaint, though. I felt I was looking at Spock, not Quinto playing Spock.

Nimoy couldn’t go wrong as Spock. I was surprised however, in that this story rounds out the character more than I expected.

Chris Pine was also believable as Kirk. His cocky assurance and humor captured the character for me. As with Quinto/Spock, I felt I was watching Kirk.

Nero was believable, and a tragic villain, like so many Start Trek villains. I found it believable he would wait to get revenge on Spock.

Some things became cliché, and I think could have been done differently. Kirk’s flirtatiousness became a little old for me. Also, why is Kirk always on the verge of falling off cliffs?

The enterprise was acceptable to me in space, and the sets were believable.

The music was good, and it swept me up in the story. I missed having the movie open with the familiar line by Alexander Courage. However, for a reboot, starting without that music was appropriate. Setting the new tone, and all that.

I almost forgot to mention the special effects. They didn’t seem like effects to me. I felt I was watching the story unfold, not watching a dazzling effects extravaganza. Even watching Star Trek II : The Wrath of Khan, I felt I was watching models. Not so this movie.

I’m giving it a 9.5/10.

159. cagmar - May 8, 2009

**1/2 out of *****

Star Trek is what you get when Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman write their absolute best screenplay to date — complete with emotion, character, humour and variety of situation — and then a second-time motion picture director absolutely shakes, rattles and rolls the life out of it. Star Trek is an entertaining story wrapped in a complete disaster of production design and direction.

Is there philosophy? A bit. Are there literary references? One, to Sherlock Holmes. But the movie is paced so abruptly and so unevenly that the audience is not allowed (even if you wanted) to engage with what few, simplistic thoughts it presents. If you wait half a second longer, what struck you as curious won’t even matter anymore. There is no thought here. There is no time to think. There are too many fights – and in order to make time for them, we loose any mention of where Nero was for 25 years and hence, we suddenly have holes in the narrative. On top of that, this movie has so many flashes of light and so much shakiness that one almost wants to look away. And if I’m not looking, why am I here?

Why? Because Bones is going to take care of me. Because Kirk is going to lead me, Scotty will make me smile, Uhura will hold me, Sulu will thrill me with his combat, and Spock will absolutely knock the wind out of me with his battle of emotion and logic. Granted Chekov won’t feel anything at all like Chekov, but it’s hard not to like this youngster anyway. There will even be bits and pieces to consider and discuss about the movie when the credits roll (if you’re sharp enough to pick them out and remember them for afterward when the booms and bangs stop).

Star Trek is going to save the franchise. The question now is, Will that be the death of it?

160. Barmey - May 8, 2009

Saw the movie at a 5:20pm showing in Edinburgh, with about 25 other people in a cinema that should hold about 150+ people, so it was a bit lacking in atmosphere. That might explain the lack of any audience reaction to the film.

My marks:

Acting = 8/10
Story/plot = 6/10
SFX = 9/10
Production design = 8/10
Music = 9/10

So, overall that should give 8/10 for the movie, but I’m deducting an extra mark for my general sense of being underwhelmed, so I give it…

7/10

It was fun and I enjoyed it, but even though the packaging was Trek, it just didn’t feel quite like Trek to me. Dunno why, but that’s how I feel.

Chris Pine and Bruce Greenwood were great. Zachary Quinto and Karl Urban were good. I enjoyed Anton Yelchin’s performance, and I didn’t think the ‘wictor/wulcan’ thing was overplayed. I so wanted Simon Pegg to be great. For me he wasn’t. Certainly his dialogue was much more realistic that the cod Scottish stuff that was written for James Doohan, but he couldn’t quite sustain the accent and I hope they make him less of the comic relief in the next film, if they make it. Other performances were pretty much just set dressing, and sadly that includes, for me, Leonard Nimoy. I hope JJ and his crew never bring back any of the old cast again. As much as I still love their performances in TOS and the movies, their day is long gone.

I liked the look of the film, but I just don’t feel energised about it the way I normally am about Star Trek. Maybe this proves I am a sad geek fan? Maybe, as The Onion joked, I am the kind of fan who needs some heavily laden moral messages in there. For me it was too much about action with no real ‘stop and think’ time. And too many plot points were just convenient, but I guess that’s about driving the action forward to assemble the crew for the next film. Oh yes, the whole kid Kirk thing and especially the whole kid Spock thing was just terrible.

Anyway, I so wanted to love this movie, and I didn’t. I just liked it. Which is no bad thing in itself. Maybe seeing too many trailers/clips/spoilers dulled my appetite for the film. Maybe if I’d had lower expectations I would have been more excited by it. Some media outlets have described it as ‘this year’s Iron Man’. I enjoyed Iron Man more, and I’m a lifelong Star Trek fan. Maybe I just need my head examined. Maybe I’m just ‘out of my Vulcan mind’.

However, my partner loved it, and she’s a casual Trek watcher, so hopefully this film is bringing new fans and much needed new life and dollars/pounds/euros/yen etc to Star Trek.

I’m going to see it again later this coming week, and maybe it’s like trying on a new pair of shoes. Maybe after I’ve worn the film in a bit, got a bit more used to the new style, I’ll revise my opinion and score. I hope so!

161. Fallen_62 - May 8, 2009

My first reaction:
I very much liked the movie, but it took time for it to sink in. I never figured myself for much of a purist, but I found myself watching how the new actors played the characters that I loved, so much that I missed most of the movie. Upon reflection, it was a very good movie and I will be going to see it again before the weekend is out.

The plot:
I’m not too big of a fan of the plot. They could have made it a lot more convincing, especially with the return of Leonard Nimoy. Even for the scope of Star Trek, the story was stretching it a little bit.

The characters:
As stated previously, I was so wrapped up in trying to see how the actors portrayed the characters that I missed most of what the movie was about. Putting that aside, I think that the new actors have done a wonderful job stepping into their characters. They are not clones of the originals, which is very nice to see.

James Kirk – Pine does an excellend job of playing the role of Jim Kirk. He didn’t have the pattented Shatner pause in his delivery, but it’s still the Kirk of old. Pine does an excellent job bringing Kirk’s cockiness, brilliance, surefooted-ness, etc. to the screen.

Spock (Quinto) – ZQ does a fairly good job at portraying the younger Spock with all of his conflicting emotions. I don’t think he quite had the calm, cool, collected Spock down very well, but the off the handle, “Amok Time” Spock was definitely there in full force.

Bones McCoy – Karl Urban did a wonderful job as Bones. The first scene where he meets Kirk I thought was a bit overdone with the southern drawl, but after that it seemed to thin out and Urban hit it spot on. He didn’t mimic De Kelly, but he certainly did his homework on Kelly, and it showed.

Uhura – Zoe was amazing (not to mention hot without her skirt and top!!) as Uhura. Strong willed, very sure of herself, by the book, etc. Zoe also brought a strength to the character that wasn’t always there in TOS, and I really liked Zoe’s interpretation of the character.

Scotty – Pegg did quite well as Scotty. Sometimes the accent wasn’t as noticeable, but he was definitely Scotty. Unfortunately, he didn’t have a lot of screen time, so I can’t say a whole lot more. Hopefully, he will be given more time in the future.

Sulu – Cho isn’t quite as “badass” as Sulu as some people made him out to be (including himself), but he is still a believeable Sulu. He wasn’t given much screen time either, so that’s about all I have for that as well.

Chekov – Yelchin did a hell of a job. His accent was a little thicker than Koenig’s, but I liked it. The initial scene with him trying to enter his code was quite funny, and him running through the halls was just hilarious! Yelchin gave Chekov that “You’re damn right I know what I’m doing” feel which was great.

Spock (Nimoy) – I’m probably going to get roasted for this, but I felt that his portrayal of the older, wiser Spock was a bit cheesy. It may be the fact that he too was under used, but I just didn’t get the Spock feel from him that I think I should have.

Christopher Pike – A wonderful portrayal of Pike. Very much a father figure that Kirk obviously lacked in this movie in his younger years. Greenwood showed Pike as a calm, collected, experienced captain of starfleet, which is spot on in my eyes of who Pike was.

Nero – You can definitely tell the rage and hate in Nero, and Eric Bana did that quite well. Overall, Bana did a good job with Nero, who I fell was a very under-developed bad guy. I feel that the reason many people think Nero “sucked” was because of the writing, not the acting. Bana played Nero as good as anyone could, given the circumstances.

Overall, the characters were played quite well. We got to see a new take on some of our favorite characters, and I think that 90% of the actors did a wonderful job in their roles. A few quirks here and there, but overall a well played movie.

The Music:
I was blown away by the score of the film. I was hoping for a bit more of the TOS feel, but I liked the score nonetheless. It complimented the films sequences very well.

The FX:
Although the lens flares got to be a bit much, I thnik that the effects shots were out of this world (pardon the pun). I saw the new X-Men movie the other night and was severely let down by the look of Wolverine’s claws, which made me worry about this film. I will just say that I had nothing to worry about. The effects shots were spectacular, and some of the best I have seen in a Trek film, or any recent film for that matter.

The ship:
I’m on the fence about the ship. The outside looked amazing, and I liked the revamp on the engineering section, but the bridge was very bright and just didn’t quite feel right to me. Some of the screens and displays made it seem like it was an iPhone on steroids. But, overall the ship looked very nice and well put together.

The overall:
Taking all things into account, this was a very good movie. Plenty of action, seriousness, comedy, character exploration (though lacking with some characters), and just left me with a sense of accomplishment. Do I think that they could have done more with the plot, developed characters more, etc? Of course. Do I want to sit in a theatre for 4 hours to watch Star Trek? Of course! But, do others? Aside from the major fanbase, most people wouldn’t be as willing as I. They couldn’t make the movie that long if they wanted the general public to get interested in it as well. For the 2 hours and 6 minutes that the movie played, it was Star Trek, and it was great. I’m looking forward to seeing it again and getting it when it releases on DVD

Scores:

-Plot – 6/10

-Characters
–James Kirk – 9/10
–Spock (Quinto) – 8.5/10
–Bones McCoy – 10/10
–Uhura – 9.5/10
–Scotty – 9/10
–Sulu – 8.5/10
–Chekov – 9/10
–Spock (Nimoy) – 7.5/10
–Christopher Pike – 9/10
–Nero – 8/10

-Music – 9.5/10

-FX – 9.5/10

-Ship – 8.5/10

-Overall – 9/10

162. Tanker - May 8, 2009

I’m not good at writing coherent reviews, so this will be sort of scattershot.

My audience was a private screening of customers and their family/friends from my comic book store, so they were predisposed to like this. They applauded every character intro (including Big E’s), every classic line, and laughed at all the humor, no matter how stupid (such as Kirk’s big hands). They even laughed at poor Engineer Olsen’s death (NEVER put on the red space suit). Many of us have been and always shall be hard-core Trekkies (since 1974, for me), but we started dealing with the “it doesn’t match canon!” issue a long time ago, so we handled it.

WHAT DIDN’T WORK

1. Engineering. I went into this wanting to like an industrial-looking engineering section. And it almost worked. But that one shot with Kirk and Scotty up in the brewery tank farm was too much. There’s no way that was on a starship; it took me right out of the movie. The water turbine was also too much, and I agree with others that that scene was needless. I also didn’t really like the engineering space on the Kelvin. Maybe I just need to see new blueprints, plus a comparison to, say, an aircraft carrier to make it all work for me.

2. The whole Delta Vega sequence. The big red monster was just stupid, and I became impatient for the scene to end. I’m pretending I didn’t see Spock watch Vulcan implode from DV’s surface.

3. All the little fiddly thingies on the bridge. What were they for? Some looked like lights — why? Yes, I know this has all been hashed out ad nauseum on this and many other sites. But there it is. I also couldn’t get a sense of what all those stations were for. It just looked like they designed it based on some idea of “looks cool” instead of giving actual thought to the function, they way Matt Jefferies did. Overall, I find myself agreeing with the critics of the production design, although not to the point of “this ruins Star Trek forever.” I do like the bridge’s new location, lower in the “bulge” so that you can enter it from the corridors instead of just the turbolift. Not sure about the “shoot here” window.

4. I found the lens flares incredibly distracting, but I wonder if I was set up to be distracted by all the discussion on web sites. I may never know.

5. Kirk’s promotion. Whatever. I chose “roll eyes” instead of “explode with rage.” My military background made that more difficult.

WHAT WORKED

Everything else. The plot was ridiculous in a similar way that ST IV’s was, but like that movie, it was so much fun that I didn’t care. I’ll single out a few things that I especially liked.

1. Count me as loving the use of contemporary pop music and other “product placement.” It made it feel like it was taking place on the future of this planet, something I never quite got from any previous incarnation of ST. “Sabotage” is a bad-ass song now, and it’ll still be a bad-ass song 250 years from now when you’re a punk kid tearing down the road in your uncle’s antique Corvette. I happen to believe that there are no further advances to be had in pop music. They’ll be listening to 20th century rock and R&B and drinking “Budweiser Classic” in the future.

2. Spock and Uhura. I’m not quite sure if this was an ethics violation, since Spock was one of Uhura’s instructors. But that might not be a concern in the future. Anyway, for me one of the emotional highlights of the film was the scene in the turbolift when Uhura asked Spock what he needed, and he said, clearly struggling to maintain his Vulcan demeanor, that he needed everyone to continue to perform in an exemplary manner. I liked how “touchy” she was with him — I believe it was Mark Leonard, possibly in conjunction with Nimoy, who decided that Vulcans were very tactile.

3. Pulse phasers, and lots of them. You can never have too much dakka!

Bottom line: despite a few quibbles, I loved it, both as a movie and as Star Trek. It’s not a great film, but it’s a good one, and a very fun one, and that’s exactly what this franchise needed to get back on its feet. I wish they could take this cast to television for a new series, so we could get to know this new ship and crew they way we did the original. My choice for the next film would be for a more Enterprise-centered plot. Enough with threats to Earth/Federation/Alpha Quadrant/galaxy. Give me a story about Captain, ship, and crew.

163. Unbel1ever - May 8, 2009

This is a repost of my review. I hadn’t realised there was review section. So I’m reposting it here for reader’s convenience. Also I have added ratings to each section.

******* Contains spoilers ************

Abrams set out to create a new kind of Star Trek, that was supposed to be more accessible to the mainstream than the previous incarnations and provide the franchise with a much need breath of life. Young, fresh, energetic and exciting. “Star Trek” has achieved this goal without a doubt. It is a new take on characters created 40 years ago, updating and grounding them in the process.

story:
“Star Trek” is a movie about the original characters, their chemistry and the way they got together. The story reflects this circumstance. From the beginning, the focus is on the characters. They are common people with initally common problems, who happen to live in the future and use starships for travelling. The struggle against Nero makes them join forces and become something more than ordinary, something special. This is probably one of the main messages of the movie, which is emphasized by old Spock practically telling this to the audience, while explaining his motives to remain on Delta Vega to Kirk. Whereas the character development is certainly one of the strong spots, the story also has several flaws. There are plot holes and logical errors, which are common to movies of this kind and can be overlooked by a forgiving audience. However, the main concern in my opinion is the villain. Nero’s motive does not become clear until very late in the movie, unless one has read the prequel comic. It being plain and simple revenge, does not fulfill the hopes of many, that Nero would be a complex multi-layered character. The reason for this is also apparent throughout the movie: It tries to tell too much in too little time. The deaths, dismissals or replacements of characters in supporting roles in order to advance the main crew in rank and position does seem far too convenient. The story spread out over two or three movies might have been more consistent and epic. Despite Abrams’ intentions the scale of the movie does not seem any larger than that of its predecessors. In fact, the lack of introduction to the Federation and its many cultures makes it appear smaller and earth centered. Starfleet apparently only consists of a few dozen ships, since the whole fleet can be engaged in one operation, in one system. It is also disturbing, how little attention is paid to the billions of deaths on Vulcan and the significance and impact this has.
Overall the story presents a mixed picture. On the one hand it provides for great character moments, on the other hand it fails to convey the big picture and the villain remains one dimensional.

Story rating: 5/10

characters:
Since the story is about the characters, it was clear that, they’re the most crucial point of this movie. One bad casting decision among the main cast, would have made the movie a faillure. As it is, there is no total loss.
In fact the “big three” are exceptionally well portrayed and Uhura can be considered an improvement over the original.

Pine’s Kirk is very different from the one played by Shatner. He had to be, since his background is completely different. Different doesn’t mean bad in this case. Pine manages to play the young rebel and the Starfleet captain equally well and several times lets Shatner’s Kirk shine through.

Quinto as Spock certainly had the most difficult task, since his performance would have to measure up the one of the original Nimoy Spock in the same movie. Even though many doubted his ability to do so in the beginning, Quinto does a great job portraying the Vulcan/human-hybrid and especially his inner conflict and the cool consideration the original is so famous for.

Undoubtedly Urban’s McCoy is the closest to the original character. He shows all the typical mannerisms and is immediately recognizable. It will be interesting to see, how the triumvirate will go on in future movies.

Uhura is the secret star of the movie. Saldana gives the character a new perspective and attitude that fits well and provides a loud female counterpart in a cast of mostly men.

Sulu and Chekov are portrayed very solid. They are what you would expect, but not much more. Hopefully Chekov’s accent will get phased out, once he grows up.

Simon Pegg’s Scotty is a pure comic relief character.He lacks the genuine engineering spirit the original Scott radiated. While he is fun to watch, the performance leaves one somewhat unsatisfied.

Nero is a missed chance. The character had so much more potential. Bana’s portrayal is flawless an convincing, however the characters lacks depth. A picture of his dead wife is not enough to convince an audience that this is his sole motivation to commit multiple genocides. Had Nero been given a similar treatment as the main cast, this movie could have been outstanding instead of just good.

There is not much to say about Nimoy’s Spock. Trekkies know how good he is and the rest will begin to suspect.

Character Rating: 8/10

design:
The production design of this movie is probably one of the things, that has been discussed the most before the release of the movie. There are several highlights, but also several downfalls. First of all, the designs of the Federation starships work altogether. The E may look odd from some angles, but it is without a doubt the federation flagship. Earth feels a lot more connected to the present, than we have seen it in previous movies, while the designs for Vulcan represent the style created for this world in the forty years previous to this movie. The uniforms are outstanding. What didn’t quite work for me are the phasers. They look more like toys than powerful weapons and it takes out a lot of the excitement of the gunfight onboard Narada, when the audience starts laughing at them.
The engineering sections of the starships have to be deemed a complete failure. They do not fit in the otherwise futuristic look of the movie. The huge tanks seen, when Kirks tries to get to Uhura at her station are out of place and ruin the otherwise fitting look of the scene.
The entrance corridor to the Federation outpost on Delta Vega could come right out of The Matrix, but certainly not Star Trek.
Nero’s ship, the Narada is a prime example of style over substance. Nothing aboard this ship makes sense. Platforms and bridges over huge canyons – without rails. It looks more like a giant squid, than a starship. While the design looks threatening, it fails to convince. The same effect could have been achieved with a more conventional approach like the Borg sphere out of Voyager’s Endgame.

Design rating: 6/10

effects:
The effects are the best done for any Star Trek production to date. The starships look alive and breathtaking, the planets convincing. ILM once again has done a great job. However, the lense flares are blinding at times and could have been tuned down a bit.

FX rating: 9/10

soundtrack:
The soundtrack is very solid and works for the most part. It is not of the same quality as those before composed by the likes of Goldsmith etc..
I can’t see it ever being played in a concert hall alongside those of Star Wars, Lord of the Rings or the previous Trek films, but it does its job.

Soundtrack rating: 7/10

If I was a normal reviewer, I would probably stop around here somewhere, but I am also a Trekkie, so:

Star Trek lore:
It was clear from the beginning, that this was going to be a complete reboot of the franchise and that is the way I have treated it. Still, I can’t help but feel a little disappointed. The awe before the great adventure that is space is gone in this movie. As well as the optimistic and peace loving attitude of mankind. Peace is not a theme of this movie. Death and destruction reign throughout. Kirk’s olive branch extended to Nero in the end feels forced and results in an unneccessary weapon spree on an already dying vessel. The most devastating line in the movie is Spock’s “not this time”, which signifies one thing: Peace is dead. Long live the evil mirror universe ! Well, the mirror universe can be fun, but it’s not why I fell in love with Star Trek. Hopefully the next movie will remedy some of this.

In general I loved the fact, that they “stole” so many scenes from the previous movies.

For example:

Star Trek I: Kirk’s shuttle ride to the Enterprise
Star Trek II: Kobayashi Maru
Star Trek IV: Scotty gets a formula from the future this time
Star Trek V: Kirk and Spock around a camp fire.
This time Kirk bumps his head.
Star Trek VIII: The Enterprise joining a battle out of nowhere and saving the day
Star Trek IX: Warpcore ejection

For the next movie, I wish they would also pay a little more attention to detail. I mean, Scotty’s transwarp beaming essentially just made a starships a bit useless, didn’t it ? They’re now nothing more than they are in Stargate. I pay attention to detail, so I don’t like to see those sacrificed in the name of a minor story point.

Trek lore rating: 5/10

In general:
I like this movie. It was good – not great, but I look forward to seeing more.

overall rating: 7/10

164. rundangerously - May 8, 2009

i caught the 10:45 show this morning – relatively empty theatre. still, i was impressed and have no problem giving it a 9 out of 10.

posted a brief review:

http://rundangerously.blogspot.com/2009/05/star-trek-movie-review.html

i enjoyed pretty much every aspect of film (though found the spock – uhura relationship unbelievable). the only thing i thought was over the top, the creature attacks on kirk when he was on the outpost and spock saving him w/fire… but that’s a tiny point.

a must see film!

165. Tony - May 8, 2009

From Italy.

I’ve just seen the film. I liked to general outline of the film and the space scenes were great.
However I’m unable to get rid of the disapointment that all the Trek I’ve been watching over the years seems to have been wrtten off by the new time line. Ok so It’s happened before in the series but at the end we were always back to “pre-set” timeline. I now know how Dallas fans felt when Bobby came back to life. I love Trek so I hope I can get over it.
Score 7/10

166. FarDreaming - May 8, 2009

Caught a 10AM show at the Egyptian in AA, MD- was 3/4th full good responses.

I enjoyed the movie, would probably give it an 8/10, but was very much upset by the destruction of Vulcan and the death of Amanda. And as has been stated above, the relatively little significance that seemed to be given to the loss of so many lives—

167. Canyunman - May 8, 2009

***** MINOR SPOILERS *****

Took my not-so-Trek-savvy wife with me to see the flick today in New York. I’m a 42 year old original series purist with a really good knowledge of canon.

First, my wife LOVED it. We left the theater and were barely in the car when she enthusiastically said she’d see it again…therefore, we’re going back on Sunday. So, I had some evidence that a non-Trek fan would indeed take to this film as promised.

My score for this movie is 10/10, plain and simple. I have a couple of small nitpicks (preferences, really) that in no way took away from my enjoyment of the movie. Namely, I wish we could have seen Simon Pegg a little bit earlier in the film. And, while I was perfectly ok with the Spock/Uhura dynamic, there was one scene between the two of them during the cadet phase of the film just before they arrived on the ship that seemed to diminish Uhura’s ability and skills, cheapened the character a little bit. If you saw the film, you may know what I’m talking about. That scene could have been taken more than one way, my wife, as a woman, disagrees with my take on that scene. Overall, nothing catastrophic.

I loved the acting. Loved the direction. (And no, the lens flares didn’t bug me). Loved the Big “E”. Loved the bridge. Loved the pacing and action. Loved the humor. Loved the story and the plot, which I had no trouble following. Loved how the Spock Prime character was used. I loved how the villain didn’t completely overtake the movie.

And yes, I even dug engineering. I guess I’m in the minority on that.

I give J.J. a TON of credit for having the guts, the sheer brass balls to do what he did. The choices he made, specifically with regard to Spock’s mother and the fate of Vulcan, had me screaming, “Holy crap, did that just HAPPEN ?!?!”” (along with a bunch of other people in the theater)

It assures me that we will get to enjoy these characters in the future with a degree of unpredictability and surprise. I, for one, am extremely happy about that. I am not at all unhappy with the future possibilities, insofar as how the adventures in the “established” canon will be affected. Will these characters all handle those future situations in the same way they did in the original time line? Will those adventures even happen now?

This Trek fan is very happy. Can’t wait to see the next one.

168. Weerd1 - May 8, 2009

Movie in general- 9
Trek feelings- still pending
This is a reprint of my blog linked above. I don’t know that I have more insight, but I wanted to share.

So, I boldly went to this movie…

Never let it be said that I don’t fulfill my promises! I said I would give my review of the new Star Trek movie, and indeed here it is. I have to start out by saying I really need to see this movie again, once it was finished, I was immediately struck by how full this movie was, and there was no way I had absorbed it all in a single viewing. The thing is this; I can’t just review the film, because I have to put it in context with my general love of Trek. To be completely honest, I still have to figure that part out, as I will talk about as we go along.

Let me give my quick non-spoiler version– it is an excellent, smart, summer blockbuster. It’s full of adventure, and great moments, and great characters. If you know nothing about Trek, you will love it. If you know everything about Trek, you will probably still love it. There are nitpicks, but what Trek movie or series hasn’t had its share of those? Despite some clever elements to the contrary, this in essence is a Battlestar Galactica style reboot, and makes for a Trek fresher than we’ve seen in quite a while. For my personal hangups, you have to delve into spoiler territory.

SPOILERS+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

NO, SERIOUSLY SPOILERS!+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

ENGAGE SPOILERS++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I won’t get into how great the cast is as these characters- they really are. The only standout as not feeling genuine is Simon Pegg, and that is nothing against him, but rather a script which has a character named Scotty who is a lot more Simon Pegg than Scotty.

Pine isn’t Captain Kirk at first, but basically just your typical wiseass, however, there is a particular moment in the film when Kirk has assumed command of the Enterprise, and he start giving orders and… there he is, Captain Kirk.

Quinto as Spock has a scene where he is standing before the admissions board of the Vulcan Science Academy, and its a scene we’ve seen alluded to in Trek repeatedly. In this moment though, Quinto takes ownership of the character of Spock, particularly against the backdrop of Leonard Nimoy in the film. Nimoy’s Spock seems less the character he’s been playing for 44 years, and more… well Nimoy. Ironically, I came out of this film feeling Quinto was more Spock than… Spock.

Now- the two real standouts here are Karl Urban as Doctor McCoy and Bruce Greenwood as Christopher Pike. Neither one has as much screentime as I wanted them to, but both instill their characters with the delightful essence of the original characters. Can’t wait to see these two in these roles again.

Zoe Saldana has a remarkable confidence as Uhura, but it is almost overshadowed by the decision to have Spock and Uhura romantically involved. I don’t mind that relationship. There’s certainly precedent for the idea in the Original Series. However, I would love to have seen the relationship actually develop on screen as opposed to catching it already in place.

John Cho’s Sulu and Anton Yelchin’s Chekov get some good moments each, and I love Chekov as this 17 year old Russian whizkid. It’s funny to listen to a guy who really is Russian deliver the cheesiest fake Russian accent you will ever hear. Sulu gets some swordplay, and flies the hell out of the Enterprise, and that’s cool.

Be fair-warned if you are a fan; we do get a bone about this story originating in the Trek universe we know, however the explanation they give really doesn’t explain how different everything is. It’s a clever thought, and not a throw away, but falls apart under careful scrutiny. Warp physics, transporter technology- completely different. Starfleet ships, including the Kelvin which shows up as existing BEFORE the time incursion from the future which changes everything, are far larger and more mechanical than before. In the “Prime” universe, a ship like the Kelvin in the year 2233 wouldn’t have a crew larger than 200- the Kelvin would seem to have four times that. Instead of cramped hallways and clean spaces we get these cavernous areas on the ship much larger than anything we’ve seen even on ships like the Enterprise D in Next Generation. For the most part though, with these differences, you don’t care. It’s all exciting. I don’t care for a lot of the external features of the new Enterprise, but I wasn’t really impressed in my initial impression of the 1701D, so it may grow on me.

So what’s my hang up? They destroy the planet Vulcan. Vulcan epitomizes the universe Trek exists in for me. Now, it’s gone. I am not sure I can get over that. I am not sure how interested I am in a Trek universe which only has 10,000 Vulcans in it. It was a ballsy thing to do, and certainly demonstrates the fact that this is not a movie which suffers from the prequel curse that we know how it all turns out in the end. However, there’s no fixing this timeline. Vulcan is gone, so TNG will not happen that way in this universe. DS9, Voyager- precluded (though maybe with Voyager, that’s not a bad thing). I would personally have been more comfortable with them destroying Earth than Vulcan. Only time will tell how I will adapt to that change.

There’s a few more little things I think I would have done differently. I would like to have seen a few more familiar aliens; would an Andorian have killed them? Not sure how I feel about the bastard child of the Jem’Hadar and the Oompa Loompa either. Since we’re on the subject of Willie Wonka, I would certainly have cut Scotty’s wild ride through the Enterprise’s waterworks (at least it wasn’t a sewer line).

However, I think I am overall quite pleased, and do look forward to seeing it again to absorb a little more. It is ultimately a very re-watchable movie, and exciting, and cool, and not stupid. Gotta see how my Vulcan feelings go though before I can decide how I truly feel about Crisis on Infinite Treks. Welcome to Star Trek’s new age.

Before I go, there’s another factor I have to discuss, and that is the second and third order effects of this film. I saw the movie with my wife, children, dear friends, and good acquaintances. Some of them were big Trek fans, some just moderately knowledgeable, and some (like my daughter) downright hostile toward Trek (I had to offer her a day off from school just to get her to go). When it was over, my daughter liked it a lot, and only we of the long time Trek fan variety had any real reservations about it. So, we came home, and my TOS fan friend and I started talking Trek, and spent the next two and a half hours really talking nothing but- favorite episodes, least favorite, what we liked or didn’t like about the other series, etc. Then, the next day at work, I spent most of the day talking about the movie with people who hadn’t seen it and wanted my opinion, and a couple who had and wanted more insight into Classic Trek. I spent a good thirty minutes talking over forty year old Trek episodes with a young man who was born during the third season of Next Generation! He wants to watch some of the old ones, and so does his young wife. If this movie can get attention for the original, and give we old timers a chance to remanence to each other and bring young fans in, I really can’t fault it. If I am going to drink the kool-aid on this one, if I am going to part with my beloved Vulcan, it’s that factor which will do it.

And maybe this will do for this generation what TOS did- already I see it on the cover of Newsweek, and on blogs and websites which wouldn’t touch the subject a few weeks ago. Maybe last years The Dark Knight, though great, was as far as we need to plumb our depths of entertainment despair as a nation. Maybe it’s time we looked across the street at those different than us, and then looked up and said “let’s go out there.” Hope isn’t outdated and campy and dressed in cardboard sets. It isn’t something we left behind in the 60’s… it’s now. It’s exciting, and palpable, and it’s moving at warp speed. Maybe, regardless of “canon” and technobabble, it’s time for Trek to be cool again.

Wow. What a world where Battlestar Galactica is the emotion driven drama, Star Trek is the epic mythological space fantasy, and Star Wars is the kid level TV show derivative of better properties.

I may just need to beam aboard for that.

169. Mike - May 8, 2009

THIS IS NOT STAR TREK

How dare anyone call this Star Trek? Despite the assurance that this is all an “alternative reality”, I truly believe that Gene Roddenberry is rolling in his grave. I am most outraged by the presence of product placements…PRODUCT PLACEMENTS…Nokia, Budweiser. Am I to believe that 23rd century Earth is still driven by profit?

I suppose the sequel will have the crew of the Enterprise battling the Borg. Except in this new, alternative reality the Borg will be a group of cybernetic beings created by Microsoft.

The destruction of Vulcan is monumentally unacceptable. J.J. and team might as well have destroyed Earth. If you know anything about Star Trek, then you know that the destruction of Vulcan is nothing less than a total assault on the very essence of Star Trek. J.J. and team have changed canon so that none of the events that we are familiar with ever really happened!

I know that there are those of you who will say I am nitpicking and that I need to realize that this is just a television show, but the truth is for thousands of fans Star Trek represents a fundamental philosophy that is to be cherished. Dismantling the meaning of Star Trek so that Paramount can make more money is nothing more than a blatant assault on the universe Gene Roddenberry created.

J.J. and team promised that they would take care to respect these characters that we are all so familiar with and the universe they inhabit. Well…they failed at their task, or perhaps they just lied in order to get Trek fans out to theaters.

I choose to completely disregard this movie as nothing but an attempt to appeal to the degenerated iPod generation preoccupied with musings of sexual indiscretion and whom possess an attention span limited to CGI.

170. New Horizon - May 8, 2009

“169. Mike – May 8, 2009
THIS IS NOT STAR TREK”

Just because you shout it, does not make it true.

The Theater full of fellow Trekkies, and I know there were a LOT of them in the packed theater because they caught ALL the in-jokes and nods to the original series, obviously LOVED the film. Destroying Vulcan is not an assault on the essence of Star Trek…the Vulcan race is part of that essence, but the planet is merely where a vessel. There will always be a vulcan so long as there is a vulcan alive.

If you think that Star Trek has somehow been dismantled, you’re really missing what the film was about and focused far too much on the medium rather than the message. This movie was Star Trek to the core and has more heart and optimism than any Trek film has had in years.

I think there is a vast majority of Trek fans who would disagree with you. I’ve been watching Trek for 30 of my 34 years on this planet. It was a big blockbuster movie, yes, but it still maintained the spirit of Trek.

171. Steven Armstrong - May 8, 2009

Just saw the movie. Great new cast, they fit perfectly. Great effects, production values, etc. However … A BIG “F” to the writers and producers who ever let this alternate timeline get produced. A great movie could have been made and still be in line with the continuity of the franchise. Here are my thoughts to the writers:

Sorry, Kurtzman and Orci, I just don’t buy it. I have watched everything Star Trek since the first episode of TOS. Of course there have been occasional slips in continuity and timeline. The new movie plot has nothing to do with the intricacies of time travel stories or quantum physics. You — with malice aforethought — just blew up Vulcan! Now every story based on Vulcan in the various Series, Movies, etc., is, what, gone? And for what? You could have blown up the Andorians if you wanted to be showy. I think you just wanted to be edgy and show how you could do something shocking.

Let’s see if you really are good writers: For the sequel, 29th century refugees from a Dominion and/or Borg dominated future manage to get back to Kirk and Spock, and they are forced to find a way to undo your first movie’s timeline, saving both 23rd century Vulcan and 24th century Romulus, because both are vital to save the future. You can have my idea free of charge.

172. Mike - May 8, 2009

New Horizon

How can the essence of Star Trek remain in tact in a universe where Jim Kirk has a Nokia car phone and drinks Budweiser beer? I suppose the episode Unification never really happened because now there is no planet Vulcan to unify with.

173. Shaved Tribble - May 8, 2009

I think the main point everyone is forgetting is *alternate* timeline. It doesnt mean previous trek has been erased but that the new one is running parralel to it. The events of the movies and tv shows we all know and love still exist its just that the new movies (you know there will be more) will take place in this new alternate timeline. I personally will be going back to the “prime” timeline by reading the novels which are very good by the way.
As far as the new movie goes I give it a solid 9/10. I will see it again and I havent seen a movie twice in the theaters since Return of the Jedi so that tells you something!

174. Fallen_62 - May 8, 2009

We don’t know that he was drinking a Budweiser. You don’t hear him order a Bud specifically, you just hear him ask for another. You hear Uhura asking for a Bud (or 2, I forgot), but so what… You’re saying that there are no brand names in the future? That Bud, Nokia, Microsoft, McDonalds, etc, won’t exist in the future because they aren’t allowed to have brand names?

Seriously, get a grip. So what if they had a few brand name labels in there. In recent history I don’t think I have seen a movie which didn’t have at least one reference to some sort of brand name. I actually found it kinda funny that Uhura was ordering these intricate drinks and then she orders 2 Budweisers. Maybe it’s me, but it struck me as mildly comical.

Take a deep breath and chill.

175. cagmar - May 8, 2009

I don’t want to sound like I’m putting down people’s concerns and fears about the timeline changes that have occurred — because they are extremely valid concerns. At the same time, however, I’m excited. I want to see what this new universe looks like.

Seeing Pike in the chair, for example, was an incredible moment for me. Not because he was where he would be in The Menagerie, no — because being in a wheelchair meant he would probably never be in the position to have the accident that mutilated him. He was in that chair, and in many ways, Nero had saved his life. It meant something to me when I saw it, but I’m sure he’s hurting. What I mean is that I’m excited to know the other universe and to be able to use it in the exploration and understanding of this new one.

Just… I want to actually SEE the movie next time. (damn it, Jim, turn off those bloody lights and stand still !)

176. jfstepro - May 8, 2009

Save any critical reviews and thank everyone involved. We have a new Star Trek film to watch!! Exciting and fresh. It will expand the fan base and save Star Trek for years to come!! Perfect?? What ever is. This is close enough.

Just for fun.. I thought of how Shatner could have been included. (spoiler alert!!) In the end old Spock could enter the shuttle after talking with young Spock. Sitting at the controls is Shatner. Kirk says.. did it work. Spock replies.. as planned. Kirk then says..see I told you it would work. The shuttle door closes and lifts off.

or.. he walks up beside Spock overlooking the ending ceramony
and says…. (you fill in the blank).

Maybe old Spock would be elated to see old Kirk alive and realize the time line was altered enough that Kirk is still alive and had been following Spock through time to bring him home.

See. It was a great movie! It makes you think about Star Trek again.

177. Swollen Ballz - May 8, 2009

DELTA VEGA

Oh well! Kirk you got to go back to a planet you know nothing of and later kill your best friend, Gary Mitchell.

SPOCK/UHURA

Interesting? IDK.

SPOCK/PIKE

I can see why Spock leaves his Captain behind again as he attempted to do in THE CAGE and still feel s loyalty towards him.

OVERALL RATING 4/10

178. Swollen Ballz - May 8, 2009

Disappointed, I am. Sorry folks.

Abrams did what he was required to do, make Paramount $$$ at all costs. He did that to the exclusion of everything else. Literally, IMO I think they should have left STAR TREK alone. I enjoy backstories based on continuity and canon. Even my kids said to me dad this is not what we watched on TV.

CANON has been destroyed for good.

179. Guy - May 8, 2009

score 3 out of 10

The movie never carries the ideas of Gene Roddenberry to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations. You could have place any Title on this movie. An angry space alien with tattoos (Romulan, even miners would not never mark up their faces it’s not their style) with a major metal issues goes on Planetary killing spree to destroy Vulcan. The planet Vulcan is a major staple in the Star Trek Universe: I just don’t like that! :(

The facts the Spock and Uhura actually are engage in a physical and more important an Emotional relationship. I mean kissing Spock on the transporter is more that Science fiction them I have ever seen. Is that Kirk’s Job.

You don’t build a Constitution Class Star Ship on Earth. You build it in space. Lets see may be you build it on an Orbiting platform on Mars. (Utopia yards) Does that make sense?

Love the Orion Girl see rocks you go Kirk :)

The Enterprise Rocks and CG looks the Best I have ever seen.

Bones is Bones that will always be a constant in the Universe.

I like that fact the you see more of the Logistics of the Enterprise, i.e. water power.

180. blake7bab5 - May 8, 2009

Just got back. The movie was very good. A worthy reboot effort to be sure. Are there problems with it? Sure…Scotty takes over engineering in a wink of an eye, Chekov running to save the day in the transporter, things like that.

At first I was taken aback that they would destroy Vulcan, but as I thought about it…why not? It could make for some interesting story lines in the future as the Vulcan’s rebuild.

Lens flares and shaky camera…get rid of it. Stop annoying my old eyes with your crazy shakes. For gods sakes, tighten the tripod!

Old Spock? I think it would have been ok without him. The story still would have worked as far as I’m concerned.

New Kirk: Very good. I like him.
New Spock: Possibilities. But the whole think with Uhura seemed forced to me.
New Sulu: I like him too.
New Chekov: Not so much. Wes Crusher with a phony accent.
New McCoy: Excellent, probably the best acted.
New Uhura: Beautiful, sexy, glowed with strength but not given enough screen time.
New Scott: I was leary of him going in, but it turned out he was nicely played.

Chris Pike: Awesome. Love Bruce Greenwood, all the way back to Nowhere Man.

A lot of complaints about the engineering sections of the ship but for me they were ok. The “drums” reminded me of the old engineer room (where Finney hid).

The bridge was cool, but with the unstable camera it was hard to get a good solid look at it.

The story itself is passable but nothing too great. The entire scene with the corvette could have been taken out with no loss to the story. The ending (after all the applause) was wonderful.

My final comment, this IS Star Trek. The entire staging of the scenes (from tickler to final feel good moment) was setup just like old Trek. The little touches that paid homage to TOS clearly showed that the writers cared about what they had inherited. The action was refreshing after 10 movies with little action (did Kirk even make a fist in TMP?).

Fun: 10/10
Story: 5/10
Acting: 7/10
Camera work: 1/10

Overall: 7/10.

ps. to those who are completely upset by this movie, you are missing one very important thing. THIS WAS NOT VOYAGER! As long as it wasn’t as dumb as that show it is a winner (IMHO)

181. yellowdog - May 8, 2009

169 – Being outraged by product placement? Please get a grip.
For example the IDIC symbol was an invention by Gene Roddenberry for the sole purpose of marketing, he just wanted to pimp it out as a cheap little jewelry trinket he could sell to fans. I am sure now the IDIC sysmbol is considered by hard core fans to be some sort of religious icon that is beyond reproach.

Get a grip this is a great movie that will help Star Trek live on for many years to come. The series seriously needed a refresh.

Sitting around griping about PRODUCT PLACEMENT in a movie and canon of a fictional universe is really embarrassing.

182. scottlukaswilliams - May 8, 2009

In 2006 I was exceptionally nervous about this movie. I had serious doubts about the producing team. Then I had serious doubts about the writing team (not that I dislike the work of Kurtzman and Orci; I just worried they might be a tad too comical for Trek). Finally, Abrams announced he had decided to direct as well and I got more worried.

Later, as casting progressed, I was kind of excited by the possibilities. My mind opened a bit. When Nimoy was cast I was very positive. I mean, he had no reason to come out of retirement to do a movie that was no good, right? Next, story details and photos were released or leaked and things were starting to look very cool. In the past month or so, reviews and comments from early screenings were so positive that I had built up the movie in my mind to something I don’t think it could have lived up to. Consequently, on my first viewing, I was pretty disappointed.

Last night, as the credits rolled, I was crestfallen. This was not the film I had been hoping for. But tonight, having seen it a second time, I’m pretty pleased.

CASTING:

Chris Pine does an excellent job as James T. Kirk. He was one of the casting choices I was unsure about but he really captured the character well. Karl Urban did a great job with McCoy as well. My one McCoy beef is that they changed the origin of his nickname, “Bones.” In the big picture, I guess that’s not too important.

Strangely, the two casting choices I applauded the loudest were the two I was least pleased by. Zachary Quinto and Ben Cross were just OK for me. Granted, Quinto is playing a Spock who is younger than we have ever seen before. He is less in control of his emotions. If there is indeed a sequel (and it seems likely) Quinto will be the one to watch for some great character development.

We don’t see much from John Cho as Sulu but we never saw much of George Takei in the role either. I think he did well. Anton Yelchin is very young but he and the writers did a good job of bringing a little more depth (or at least potential for depth) to Chekov.

Zoe Saldana is beautiful and she did a good job of displaying Uhura’s prowess. Nichelle Nichols was never given a great opportunity to shine. Uhura’s romantic relationship with Spock is a bit odd for me. Sure, there were a few moments in the original series where you could maybe think Uhura was jonesing for Spock (who wasn’t?). I guess it’s a tribute to the writers and Saldana that you could believe Nyota as a woman Spock would be interested in. I just feel bad for poor Christine Chapel (if there is a Christine Chapel in this new alternate timeline).

I was never on board with Simon Pegg as Scotty. I was named after Montgomery Scott so I have a bit of an attachment to him. Scotty was always a bit of a comedian but I object to him being played for comedy every time he was on screen. And what was with Deep Roy as his tiny companion?

Bruce Greenwood makes a great Christopher Pike although I thought it was slightly cheesy to have him end up in a wheelchair. Maybe that’s the universe trying to correct itself? The other great Starfleet captain was Faran Tahir as Capt. Robau. While everyone else was swooning over Pine, I was definitely on Team Tahir.

JJ has said repeatedly that the casting was what he was most worried about. I think, for the most part, he got that right.

STORY:

For me, the story was lacking. Of this new film, Claudia Puig (USA Today) said: “Unlike previous incarnations, there are no weighty scenarios or moral quandaries in this refashioning of Star Trek…” Therein lies the problem. These big ideas: political, social, ethical, etc. are, to me, what Star Trek is about. If I just wanted to watch lame CG creatures and frenetic space battles I could watch Star Wars: Episode II. Ugh.

This film really just didn’t have room for much story. It needed to devote a lot of time to set-up and introduction of characters to get the new target audience on board.

Though I was at first totally shocked and now deeply saddened that Vulcan has been destroyed, that plot point leaves an opening for some great emotional storytelling in a sequel. I’m hoping for some crazy Spock Pon farr stuff in the next one.

I was disappointed to read and then see that the Rura Penthe sequence had been cut. I think the movie would have greatly benefited from that stuff. I would definitely have preferred it to the “sex scene.”

I read the official prequel comics which I think were of great help to the story. Nero, Spock and the Romulans’ tattoos are all explained here. They explained the destruction of Romulus a little more clearly. They also sort of explain this Red Matter stuff. I said when I read the comics that the science was questionable. Seeing it in the movie, the science is kind of laughable. Humanoids and their vessels survive a trip through a black hole? Come on?!

DESIGN:

I love the new Starfleet uniforms! It was genius to separate them into two layers to create the same collar-look of the original series. I also like the USS Kelvin uniforms. I think they were a nice little nod to the uniforms on ST: Enterprise. It’s a nice evolution.

The make-up was great. They were clearly using new materials for the pointed ears. It added a more real quality to them for sure. I don’t think the Vulcans were quite as green as they should have been.

The Starfleet vessels with their so-called “iBridges” were not as bad as I thought. The touch-screen technology was cool and there were subtle nods to the original series in the shapes of consoles, etc. What I hated about being on the Enterprise was all the lense flare! Geez. It could have been done more sparingly.

I get where they were going with the highly industrial bowels of the ship but it seemed a tad too expansive. Where was the warpcore? When they ejected the core, several little modules could be seen leaving the ship. Was that it? I missed big throbbing cylinder of power!

Nero’s ship, the Narada, was just weird. The design made no sense. Why was most of it cavernous and empty with random platforms hanging around? Maybe that’s all storage space for stuff they would have mined? More likely, they just thought it made a cool setting for a fight.

MUSIC:

Possibly my biggest complaint about the film is Michael Giacchino’s score. His new Trek theme is kind of lackluster. They didn’t even play the original Trek fanfare for the reveal of the Enterprise!? What’s up with that?

I really hated his “bad guy” theme. It seemed juvenile and really Mickey Mousey.

Overall, I guess the score mostly works but it certainly doesn’t live up to its predecessors. The magic that Jerry Goldsmith, James Horner and Cliff Eidelman created is a huge part of Star Trek’s appeal to me. These are the great symphonies of our time. To ignore them completely, I think, was a mistake.

Sure, at the very end we have Alexander Courage’s fanfare and original theme but it’s done in a very kitchy way. I felt it lacked the respect that should have been given.

FINAL THOUGHTS:

As I write this, Star Trek has a rating of 8.4 on IMDB and it’s now in the IMDB’s top 250 films. On RottenTomatoes it’s at 96%. The applause in the theatre was a clear sign that audiences are overall thrilled with this film. Though I cannot agree with those who say this is now the best Trek film, I would say it’s in the top 5 or 6.

I was dismayed by the tagline “This isn’t your Father’s Star Trek.” That’s the Trek I fell in love with and this new re-boot isn’t going to change that. In the end, I’d say it’s a worthy addition to the franchise and most definitely worth watching.

Now that the characters and this new alternate timeline are firmly established I’m eager to see what stories could be told. I do hope that the next film has a bit less action and a bit more thinking but it seems that my 2006 fears of a death to the franchise were unwarranted. Star Trek will live long and prosper.

7/10

183. Sarah Stroud - May 8, 2009

My husband and I both saw the movie tonight. We loved it. It exceeded our expecations.

To JJ Abrams and the Supreme Court: To quote Charles Dickens, “Please, may I have some more?”

184. Jovan - May 8, 2009

If you’re a sceptical fan, don’t be. Not only is this a good Star Trek movie, it’s the first one that everyone can watch and get. If you’re a Trekkie who will look for everything that’s different, don’t do it. You’ll only get bogged down in details when you should pay attention to the story. As well, try not to look for all the cameos and easter eggs the first time around that you’ve heard about. Wait until you see it the second time, which is what I’ll do.

The characters are all well acted, getting the essence of them yet not being slavish to the original actors’ performances. Chris Pine is going to be a major star for sure. He was well chosen for the way he carries himself and almost has a cockiness about him. Karl Urban was perfect as McCoy. While he’s the closest to an “imitation,” it didn’t feel like one. It felt as if he channeled the late DeForest Kelley himself. Zachary Quinto had a slightly different, but still very valid take on Spock and was well developed as a conflicted “child of two worlds.” Zoe Saldana was far from Nichelle Nichols’ performance, but I didn’t mind one bit since she made it her own. Simon Pegg was a great “Scotty” but should have had more screen time. Sulu by Jon Cho was anything but Harold Lee from the cult classic “White Castle” movie, but still had a sense of humour that fit the character well. Anton Yelchin playing Chekov was very, very Russian — much more than Walter Koenig’s subtle take on the accent. Only thing I missed was his claims about things originating from Russia (which were funny in the original series because you’re never sure if he’s messing with the other characters or actually believes it).

The special effects worked because they both looked believable and had a great sense of scale that has been missing in a lot of recent films. They struck a perfect balance between real and digital that was often seamless. They didn’t overuse CGI where it was unnecessary or try anything ridiculously complex that ends up looking fake anyways (see Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith for prime examples of such digital blunders).

Sound design by Ben Burtt was simply incredible and had high artistic value in the way he presented sound — or didn’t. The opening scene draws you in using sound alone. The effects themselves were often reminiscent or remixed versions of sounds from the original series, which is nice nostalgia for fans.

The art direction was definitely different. Some of it I didn’t agree with (like the lower decks looking like a bottling facility) but it doesn’t totally detract from it. The Enterprise herself still has the same general design, otherwise the fans would have picketed outside Paramount without a doubt.

In their attempt to be more mainstream, it could be hit or miss. The mention of modern brand names makes sense to an extent, though one reference slaps you upside the head with being an obvious plug for a sponsor. I’m not sure if I welcome that with open arms. It was sort of funny but also sort of made you roll your eyes at the same time.

There are a few significant changes. Try to keep an open mind. I did, and I thought it made the characters all the more interesting.

Based on the response from my friends (all three who went with me were non-fans), Trekkies and movie goers alike will enjoy the film. You don’t need to know anything about Trek to enjoy the movie, but it helps if you do.

185. Mike Carlson - May 8, 2009

I liked it. That being said, I didn’t like how they seemed to cater it to teen aged girls and tried to “jock it up”, meaning they dumbed it down and relied too much on pretty lights and not enough explanation in the details. The Sci-Fi was considerably weak compared to previous Star Trek movies, the character development was somewhat lacking, and the plot line pretty sketchy in several parts of the movie. [Since when did carrying around 'red matter' suddenly become a simple means of creating black holes that let you time travel when you entered them? And how is it that ejecting your warp core into (plasma cores? I don't see how they went into warp without any warp cores, I may have misunderstood this part) a black hole make it explode with a blast wave that pushes you out of the grasp of a black hole's gravity, when in fact light itself can't even escape it's gravity,(again, the black hole was depicted as a lightning storm... Hugh?) let alone a common blast wave... and gravity shouldn't have any effect on warp engines anyway, because they don't propel the ship in a linear fashion rather than fold space, it's not how it works! You go to hell JJ Abrams!]

So basically take the show with Jack Bauer “24” and put it into a futuristic setting and you have Star Trek 2009. You have the rebellious and reckless yet genius good guy, the half crazy bad guy with over simplified reasons driving his evilness and his crew of thugs that all just happen to offer blind loyalty, the girl (this whole Spock/Uhura thing really turned me off), and a race to save the country, or in this case, the planet. ZZZZ… I know, it’s sounding like I really didn’t like it that much after all. Well, I did, it’s just that my expectations were not met. I left the theater liking the movie, but I didn’t leave with a feeling of awe, that feeling that makes you want to sign up for Star Fleet Academy and go on a space adventure. That feeling that makes you want to invent transparent aluminum, or a disruptor. Too much shallow thrill, too little deep thought. Again, it seems we have stupid people to thank for the continuing diminishment of good Sci-Fi entertainment. (See my previous posts concerning Sci-Fi shows being canceled on TV)

I didn’t like some of the changes, things like how the phasers fired, and how the transporter beam looked, and how Captain Pike was such a wuss. I REALLY didn’t like how they chose John Cho (not even Japanese) to play Sulu (I just couldn’t get Harold and Kumar out of my head, and the pot smoking idiot seemed to surface at moments in the movie) and had problems seeing Zachary Quinto (Spock) as anyone other than Sylar getting ready to cut the top of my head open, though he does really look like a Spock. It felt like Karl Urban as Dr. Leonard “Bones” McCoy was supposed to be a Saturday Night Live look alike Spoofing the original McCoy mocking his demeanor. Simon Pegg as Montgomery “Scotty” Scott was spot on, I loved this character. He rocked. Finally Chris Pine as James T. Kirk, was an acceptable choice, though he seemed to lack the suave of the real James Tiberius Kirk. Of course Leonard Nimoy did a great job despite his minor role.

Why the heck did they have Lenard Nimoy utter the famous phrase “Space: the final frontier. These are the continuing voyages of the starship Enterprise. Her ongoing mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life-forms and new civilizations, to boldly go where no one has gone before.” (Changed from “to boldy go where no MAN has gone before.” to appease the politically correct, barf, yet changed “it’s” to “Her”, seemingly contradicting just that) when it should have been Chirs Pine and Capt. Kirk?

Why did Captain Nero have such a huge grudge and hatred for Spock for failing to save Romulous, despite risking his own life and trying his best to do so? Pretty stupid basis for becoming an evil bad guy that chases Spock through time and space for 25 years and destroys a planet of 6 billion Vulcans (who are apparently completely helpless to a big mining ship in orbit, unlike earth that had Nero torchuring Pike to get the defense codes so he could attack that too with his red vial of goo).

I’m not too sure I liked the idea of changing the whole time line either. Why not just make up a whole new time line to cheese in whatever plot and story line you want in every movie? It’s easy and doesn’t require a lot of research, etc… meh.

But I still liked it. It was a fun movie, really. It evoked emotion (good or bad, doesn’t matter, which is my #1 requirement that a movie must do to pass as good) and… it was fun. But most of all it was Star Trek, and that beats out a whole lot of other trash in the theaters right now. (But I liked X-Men Wolverine a lot too :)

-Mike

Edit: There are several scenes that could have definitely been done much better. One that comes to mind is when Sulu, Kirk and the extra parachuted to the mining drill to disable it. The extra dies, Kirk and Sulu land and start fighting a couple of Romulans coming out of the drill head… they fight, they win, nothing very entertaining…

In my revision, after the extra dies, 3 or 4 additional Romulans come out to fight with their ‘swords and axes’ no guns allowed here, that would make too much sense, and as Kirk is spending the whole time trading blows with the first Romulan, Sulu busts out his collapsible sword and begins to really tear it up, a cross between The Matrix and Quentin Tarantino style, really sweet hack and slash destroying a much larger group of Romulans than appeared in the movie… as the last Romulan goes down by Sulu’s blade, (the one he stabs through and saves Kirk, who was watching Sulu tear it up while fighting his own foe, Kirk gets up, brushes his shirt off, calmly looks at Sulu and says “Fencing you say?” Sulu replies, Aye sir, fencing” and smiles.

Get it? Sulu accepted the mission claiming combat capabilities, then later we find out his combat capabilities are JUST fencing, so it’s like a let down and a joke, but then we see him display incredible skills of a real swordsman with years of traditional background and everyone is again emotionally jerked in another direction and the fencing joke is replayed on a whole different level. That’s a good Star Trek scene.

Edit Scene Revision Two:

The scene where they eject the pods of something into the black hole to explode and have the blast wave push them to safety (Just stupid)…

My version:
Kirk tells Sulu to get out of there after shooting up the Romulan ship, but alas the black hole has a grip on the Enterprise and it can’t escape the gravity well even with warp engines chugging away…

Kirk goes tells Scotty he needs to do more bec. what is happening now isn’t enough, then you see Scotty running around like a chicken with his head cut off trying to figure out how to get more power to the engines, which he already said he can’t do, looking for a way out of this, and instead of Abrams lame escape method, the camera pans away from Engineering to the shaking bridge and you suddenly see the enterprise escaping the black hole. Kirk goes down to Engineering to congratulate Scotty but notices something is very wrong on the ship on his way, he just hasn’t put his finger on it (but with clues it’s obvious to an aware audience, he gets there and thanks Scotty for a job well done, then asks Scotty how he did it, he looks around and there is a lot of missing stuff in the engineering bay, as well as all over the ship. Scotty replies “Sometimes you have to pay the bully your lunch money to get out of a lost fight” Get it? BECAUSE HE BEAMED EVERY NON-ESSENTIAL THING OFF THE SHIP reducing the ships mass allowing the engines to escape the black hole due to the lower gravitational pull they have to fight against. …. and you get a laugh from the audience or whatever, and you think it’s over, but it’s NOT! Kirk does his “GOOD JOB” thing in a new tone of voice and tells Scotty he’s going to XXX part of the ship to check on whatever, then Scotty stops him and says he can’t, Kirk looks at him questionably, and Scotty replies “It’s no longer there, sir”… Kirk “Are we getting home OK Scotty?” Scotty “Aye sir” Kirk “Good Scotty, Good”…

THAT’S GOOD STAR TREK! A rough draft for sure, but much better.

186. Rich - May 8, 2009

I was optimistic for the first 15 minutes or so. I know the unspoken purpose of this film is to generate revenue/obtain a wider fan base. I also understand and respect the ‘alternate timeline’ plot device to provide a clean slate for re-imagining. But after all that, we are treated to an undeveloped, awkward plot featuring another vengeful heel (Nero) in another big, powerful ship. This was over done around the time of Nemesis.

I would fault the movie for poor writing even if it wasn’t Star Trek. Even Leonard Nimoy’s dialogue was ill-suited to Spock and seemed like a plot gimmick. The actors did an admirable job with what they were given…but there were too many catch-phrase exchanges instead of real dialogue. There were moments when I felt like I was hearing the Simpsons or Family Guy parody Star Trek. Even the techno-babble and jargon was dumbed down…as though the writers mined old Trek for soundbites and vocabulary to paste into the script. In contrast, we watched an episode of TNG when we got home and I felt like they managed to say a lot more with a lot less (budget and effects) back in 1992.

I dislike CGI. I think it is an easy way around good writing and filmakers consider CGI budget to be money well-spent at the cost of creating a rich story without it. The old Star Trek TOS, for all its low budget and occaisionally hammy delivery, worked almost like a stage play and this is gone from most films today. This movie had a lot of CGI but I couldn’t get into the setting the way some of the older Star Treks really got my imagination working. None of this CGI looked as good to me as The Search For Spock or Wrath of Khan managed with their meager-in- comparison financing.

Much like Star Trek The Motion Picture, the studio brought in new talent (I like some of JJ Abrams’ stuff) and tried to wow us with improved visuals and gimmicks, but both re-imaginings failed basic story-telling techniques through laziness. Star Trek did need something of a change after the numerous episodes of the last two decades but for now we’ll have to settle for Battlestar Galactica on dvd.

187. Nock - May 8, 2009

This was a great movie, it held very true to most of the trek guiedlines and kept every thing true to trek, but in the same aspect it was extremly diffrent almost like the last series, i belive j.j. abrams lived up to him self once again making not just a movie but an expierience for all, he made it somthing that people who were not fans of the show could enjoy and also somthing a fan from the original series could enjoy. the altedrnet time line kinda of thru me off cuz as we all know in the shows story line vulcun was always vulcun not some colonie, but in traditional star trek fashion temporal parodoxes are a must and will confuse and give u a head ach if you think to much in to it so its beter to just enjoy, i also loved how they stayed to true to mcoys catch phrases and scotty was exelent kirk was really good and i love how they had to give sulu the sword haha

188. Billy Bobby - May 8, 2009

Did this movie leave anyone else with mixed feelings? Don’t get me wrong, I enjoyed the movie but it has left me with a strange feeling inside. There is so much to analyze I don’t know where to start. I’ll start with the special effects.

I thought IL&M did a great job. When the Enterprise was first exposed, it almost looked like a model. I personally love it when they use models instead of computer graphics; but in this case I didn’t mind it was a computer graphic because it looked so good.

Music wise, I liked it. At times, I was reminded as James Horner and other great Star Trek composers.

The cast was pretty good. Carl Urban did a much better job than I anticipated. I just wish there would have been more scenes with him. What happened the the Kirk-Spock-McCoy triad? Perhaps they didn’t have the time in this 2 hour rebirth so I will let it pass for now. Overall, all the other performances were great.

But as Kirk said from ST III, “Yet I feel uneasy and I wonder why”. The science plot holes do not disturb me because I do not hold ST to high plausibility standards (i.e., Red Matter, escaping a black hole, unbelievable beaming).

Perhaps it is that Star Trek in some ways is unrecognizable. Don’t get me wrong, in some areas it was clearly the Star Trek I love. But the Gene Roddenberry days are over. Star Trek is no longer a commentator on social and moral issues. Star Trek is just now an action franchise that appeals to the large masses. Before, Star Trek was reserved to people who appreciated an intelligent show. Now, it has been degraded to the point where it tries to appeal to the average Joe. The new fans are probably thinking, “Where can I get me one of them phaser rifles?”

In order to appeal to the average Joe who seeks only action from movies, Paramount has dramatically changed Star Trek. The time line we all know and love has been wiped out of existence in order to make it easier for the new “average Joe” fans. Paramount must have thought, “None of these people will watch TOS. How can we get around this problem? I know! Lets make it so that it never happened.”

While this is a great way to expand the Star Trek base, it leaves me feeling a little sad. This does not mean that I oppose this move. This was a necessary move to keep the franchise alive. Star Trek had to expand its rapidly dwindling base. Unfortunately, it leaves me saddened in the process. Star Trek is alive but at what cost?

189. Mike - May 8, 2009

It seems that there are people here who are so desperate for a Star Trek movie that if they had to they would accept a Star Wars film as Star Trek if it were labeled as such.

Yellowdog – I am sorry, but Coca-Cola and McDonald’s do not exist in Gene Roddenberry’s universe. If you can so easily accept product placement, then I seriously question your credibility as a Star Trek fan. It seems to me that you would be willing to accept anything just as long as it had the name Star Trek. According to you, fans of Star Trek shouldn’t be upset that the last 40 years of established precedent have been overlooked, because to be so concerned over a fictional show is embarrassing. Somehow I do not think it is any more embarrassing than your taking the time to post a message on trekmovie.com and debate the matter. “Romeo and Juliet” starring Leonardo DiCaprio isn’t Shakespeare just because it has the same title. Fans have every right to voice their concerns, after all fans have been the life blood of this franchise for over 40 years. I would rather them never make another second of Star Trek footage EVER then to have J.J. and company bastardize this franchise.

190. Billy Bobby - May 8, 2009

188

I forgot to rank it. 5 out of 10 from me (right in the middle). This may change because with each passing second I am more saddened. Sigh.

191. Larry - May 8, 2009

Saw the movie last night and thought it was tremendous. The film was well designed, shot, and edited, but most importantly, it was perfectly cast. The principles all embodied the essence of these characters without doing impressions of what came before, making it believable while keeping it familiar. I live in Pittsburgh, very near where Zachary Quinto grew up, and there was a group of people in the theater who knew him and were absolutely thrilled to see him grace the screen. In fact, the whole audience seemed to really enjoy it, and they erupted into applause as the credits rolled. I give it a 9/10, just because I see room for growth.

192. brokenheartedtrekfan - May 8, 2009

Saw it in IMAX tonight. I wanted to love this film, wanted to be a new fan all over again, but I came out of the theater disappointed.

First ten minutes had tears streaming down my face, but it fell emotionally flat after that.

Pines as Kirk and Urban as McCoy were both treasures.

Movie was truly HUGE in scope with breathtaking special effects. Good humor, never boring or uninteresting.

But the writers really made some equally huge and irreversible story decisions, and I’m just not feeling the vibe. In addition, the time travel element is so important that it will be impossible to escape for all future episodes of this reboot, which is unfortunate. You might even see Leonard Nimoy reprise his elder Spock role as a regular occurrence, perhaps counseling his younger self who, in this version of Star Trek, has an almost Jekyl and Hyde personality.

I wanted to see how the original crew got together, and I got the story of how a different crew got together. And the new lovey dovey kissy kissy Spock thing? I’m not buying it folks. Sorry.

And did anyone else get the feeling that Kirk was almost Spock’s sidekick?

To the new crew: may you live long and prosper. But I cannot join you on this new journey. My heart remains in the universe unaltered by Nero, which I would have loved to see this new cast represent.

We’ll always have TOS, and on Blue Ray now.

5 out of 10.

193. Mr. "There are always possibilities" - May 8, 2009

I just came from seeing Star Trek.

This was a geat movie. 9 out of 10.

Here are the strong points without detail, and the one dissapointment, and thh bottom line:

*the casting was superb. The actors knew their characters. I was extremely pleased with all of the actors, but was unexpectedly surprised by the incredible performances of Ben Cross as Sarek, Winona Ryder as Amanda, and Zoe Saldana as Uhura. Quinto is the Spock for the 21st century, and Urban’s McCoy will be right at his side. Pine was great as Kirk.

*These are the characters created by Gene Rodenberry. This is Star Trek. There is no doubt.

*There are so many Star Trek references in it, I felt right at home. For example, and for those who haven’t seen it, when Kirk is eating the apple, think back to Star Trek II.

*The alternative timeline is well explained and well handled. It’s a good way to give Star Trek a new look.

*Although lacking a comprehensive socio/politial theme, it touched on a few imporant topics, like racism, torture, and war, especially the “eye for an eye” philosophy.

*The story was captivating, with the action as well as comic relief you come to expect from Star Trek.

Here’s the one dissapointment: they didn’t restore the timeline. I got a sinking feeling in my stomach, as I realized the implication was that all of the adventures I had watched since childhood now no longer existed.

(If you are reading this Mr. Abrams, or Mr. Orci, Please know that you made a fantastic movie that this fan of 40 years loved. I hope it is the biggest cinematic event of the year. I only ask that somewhere along the way, you restore the timeline.)

The bottom line: This is the best movei I’ve sen int eh past five years and the best Star Trek movie in at least ten years. After you see it come back with your family and friends who may not be big Trek fans, but who like good action/adventure, good story telling, great effects and great acting.

I hope you love it as much as I do.

Live Long and Prosper, and Boldly Go.

194. Turbolift - May 8, 2009

I waited over 2 years for this movie…I was nervous at the beginning. I have loved this franchise. In 1974, in 4th grade I circulated a petition to bring the show back (omg…that is so funny now, but true). I saw it today. Thank you JJ, Bob Orci and all…the casting was brilliant, the story, though limiting, gives you a clean slate and you deserve it. It was wonderful. It was Star Trek as I’ve never seen it but always wanted some day be. I respect what was…but I am so excited to see what will come. You did not let me down in any way. Thank you so much…you made me very happy today.

195. Yammer - May 8, 2009

Blowing up the planet (spoiler) was fantastic, by the way.

What better way to say that this is not like Rick Berman Trek, where everything is nicely reset at the end, and there was never any jeopardy or risk?

Think of the setup this gives the sequels. FORGET KHAN. Bah. Khan was done.

The (SPOILER) are now a people in exile. Remember when the Klingons feared being the alien scum of the galaxy? Shades of the Palestinians, the Jews, the Ahmaddiya, the Bahai, the Roma — all of these wanderers can now be alluded to, their strengths and sufferings mined and contrasted.

It was a bold stroke.

196. Nelson L. - May 8, 2009

I just got married last Saturday. So I’d like to thank my wife, for treating me on our honeymoon on the beautiful island of Maui—to watch Star Trek. I loved it. As a long time Star Trek fan (25+years all series), and faithful TrekMovie visitor (although, this is my first post) I can say that I’m excited for the future of Star Trek. The cast was perfect, the effects were awesome. There were shots that we have been long over due. Having said that, here’s some feedback, JJ&Co.:
1-not origin, very much a reboot!
2-Tweek the Enterprise insides a bit, and you got it!
3-No Vulcan? That was painful!
4-Enterpise weapon sound were a bit cheesy.
5-Keep it within the canon as much as you can as a “pre-destiny” paradox, in other words somethings must happen in the Star Trek universe.
6-the ending was bit too much like Galaxy Quest (although I loved that movie!), less product placements: we’re in a better future…at least they can have better beer…
7-ok, you’ve used your allotted warp core ejections… Sorry, but Picard at crew spent that last minute save too much
The movie alternative universe is no different than the mirror universe or other universes we’re used to. The best part of the movie:
1-great fx with the Enterprise the way she was meant to be seen.
2-cast, wonderful.
3-realism in space….sounds, etc were much needed.
4-beautiful shots of Vulcan and Earth.
5-great emotional moments, keep them coming!
6-Kelvin moments were awesome!

As a long Star Trek lifer, I am all for saving our dear franchise, JJ&Co have a huge responsibility to us and our “universe”, if they pour more talent and great story telling, we will be fine. As Gorkon said, “If there is a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it”. I’m happy to have a Star Trek movie to see in the theater. Sometimes, we need to let go of our past to have a future.
Also, the canon timeline exists still…!
Great job on STAR TREK!
7-costume design was great!

197. Cadet to Captain? WHAT! - May 8, 2009

Ok, the movie was well made… great characters, set designs, effects etc. etc.

But honestly, the cadet to captain thing is really coming close to blowing it for me. This is so stupid its really just totally unbelievable.

First, there is absolutely no way this could ever happen, not in the Trek we know, and not in any military organization we are familiar with.

Second, doesn’t it cheapen the rank of captain? As has been said in previous reviews, it seems being a captain is a lot about experience. Yet Kirk has about zero.

Anyway, this has left me really conflicted. I’m actually pretty upset that I loved the rest of the movie so much, and think they got a lot right, and then do something so stupid like this that it almost undermines everything. It’s really an insult to everyone’s intelligence.

198. snowcat - May 8, 2009

Ok, I haven’t read all the way through this page, so maybe it’s been said, but-

They ARE making a sequel. Right? They’ll probably fix some of these issues in the next movie. I seriously doubt that they’d leave Vulcan gone, considering how much it conflicts with Trek canon. They can’t be that insane. So, maybe more time travel next time? God, I hope so. If not I’m going to be very unhappy.

But overall, it was amazing. Almost had a seizure from the flashing lights, and could not believe the Spock and Uhura thing at all, but they did a great job other than that. I was cheering.

199. Billy Bobby - May 8, 2009

188 and 190

I’m officially depressed now. This is the same feeling I had after watching Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. However, this movie has taken just a little longer to sink in. This has been eating at me all night since I have left the theaters. This movie didn’t work. I take back my statement saying that altering the time line was necessary to keep the franchise alive. Better writers could have made a better movie instead of this piece of junk.

1 out of 10. The 1 is for the effort.

Shame on you Paramount for giving this the green light. Goodbye Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Star Trek. Three graves within a decade. Amazing.

200. Charlie in Colorado - May 8, 2009

Best. Trek. Film. Ever!

The audience applauded (and I mean *applauded*) at the end of the film, which is something that doesn’t happen all the time. I went in expecting a lot based on the buzz and I was not disappointed. Great acting, solid script, class film. Trek is not only back, but it’s cool again.

JJ, get that sequel started!

201. KevinA Melbourne Australia - May 9, 2009

Gee I feel sad for all those who can’t get the head out of the 60’s. So sad!
Nearly every single episode of Star trek had the occasional flaw or canon violation. And yes I have read all the nitpicking books as well. This movie has flaws to but I’ll be damned if I ever let that destroy my excitement of a new story.

I’m actually glad if that some of the “TOS ONLY” purists hate the movie. ’cause maybe now the rest of us can get on with the joy of watching a new exciting young STAR TREK future evolve into new movies and shows and those who are over it can just fade away.

OK over that. I have been a fan of Star Trek since the 60’s. Captain Kirk was my hero, Spock someone I wanted to aspire to be. Next Gen showed me that lightning can indeed strike twice and again with DS9, Voyager and Enterprise which was only reaching it’s stride in season 3 and 4 the same way Next Gen and the other series did.

I, like you all, have waited for 4 years or more since Enterprise finished to see this new TREK leap off the screen. I am overjoyed. Not only is it a great movie but it’s rekindled my passion after all these years. My friends including the non-Star Trek fans are all saying the same thing… When is the next one!

4 chears to JJ and team, the briliant cast and to you Anthony for the fun of the countdown over the last years. STAR TREK is back and it’s a gas!!!

202. Charles Trotter - May 9, 2009

I neglected to mention Leonard Nimoy in my review. Shame on me! It was great to see him back as Spock. He did a wonderful job (as always); it was as though he never stopped playing the part.

Ok, as you were.

203. Engineering officer - May 9, 2009

I had serious reservations about this going into the cinema. Some of them were borne out –

– The science stuff. Yes, I know it’s fiction, but stars going nova don’t provide the sort of threat Spock Prime mentioned. “Several solar systems” would surely have been sufficient
– Cadet to Captain. Not going to happen. In any military organisation. In any universe. Ever.
– The slapstick scenes with McCoy and Kirk. It’s stupid. It doesn’t do the characters any favours
– The romance. Can we forget this ever happened? It’s unnecessary, and is likely to get in the way in future adventures if it continues.

BUT…
It was exciting, it DID explain the AU timeline very well (though it was NOT made clear that the ‘prime’ universe is still there), and after a slow start that had me wondering whether this was really a good idea, it turned into a cracking good adventure.

The characters –

Kirk – Pine nails it. His first scenes in the bar were too unKirklike (dialogue-wise) for me to buy, but once he gets on to the ship, yep – he’s Kirk.

Spock – It helps that Quinto looks SO like the young Nimoy. It was a shame the romance totally undermined the establishing of this character as “emotionless”, but that wasn’t the actor’s fault. He did well.

McCoy – Brilliant. Absolutely the best of bunch – spot on from the moment he steps on screen, and “you’re out of your Vulcan mind” was the icing on the cake

Scotty – This was the one I’d had the most worries about (especially as he’s always been my fave character). He’s not QUITE right yet, though that’s not Pegg’s fault – some of the lines he’s given to deliver are a little silly, and the stupid sidekick thing has GOT TO GO, preferably into the business end of a warp core. For the next movie, I hope the writers show us more of his serious, professional side, and a little less of the smart-ass humour, but given the lack of screen time he had to establish the character, it wasn’t bad. Certainly much better than I’d feared!
And I LOVED that in order to save the ship he “jettisoned the fuel and ignited it” :-)

Uhura – Well, at least she was doing more than opening hailing frequencies. But shouldn’t she have reported that intercepted message to someone other than her room-mate?

Sulu – No prob with the actor. Again, some of the stuff he was given to do was a tad silly, but the quibbles were minor

Chekov – Shouldn’t really be there, but okay let’s stretch a point. Not sure where this genius came from – he sure didn’t act like this in the ‘prime’ universe. But okay, so long as he now sits back and lets the Science Officer and Chief Engineer do their jobs. Please

Pike – Greenwood was fantastic, gave the role the gravitas it needed and anchored the early part of the film.

The Directing – Could have used less of the handheld stuff – it wasn’t always easy to tell what was going on. Same goes for the quick cuts, and the sound level – it was sometimes impossible to hear what was being said. And I’m fairly sure some of what I missed was important.
As for those wretched lens flares – can they be taken out for the DVD release?

The ship – I thought it sucked when I saw the stills. Sadly, it still sucks. The outside looks squashed, the inside… The Bridge (as others have said) does not feel like ‘home'; engineering is a total mess, and where’s the logic in having the Enterprise having water pipes and turbines? TURBINES!!! What is this, the Titanic?
Refit please, for next time

Overall mark: 6
(But bear in mind I was anticipating giving it a 1 when I went in there.)

204. Hawaiowa - May 9, 2009

Bananaland Review–

First off, if you want sci-fi with a ‘message’, I suggest the anime series PlaneteS, which is to the 2000s what Trek was to the 1960s…in a sense, I see PlaneteS as the sequel to the Trek universe. Given that, here’s a review to add to the other reviews written by much more knowledgeable people than I. To give it some character, I’ll present it using the chronology of the mis-en-scenes in the film:

The opening was very powerful, perhaps the most intensely emotional-eliciting bit of Trek since the opening of DS9 when Sisco watches his wife get killed in Wolf 359. Absolutely riveting, and sets up an almost messianic origin story for Kirk. For non-Trekkers, this heavy sequence provides an emotional hook that assuredly would grab viewers new to the Trek experience. Capt. Robau, although a doomed character, provides a very strong commander’s template: decisive, courageous, strident and concerned about the welfare of his crew. Having him die off screen, revealed by termination of lifesigns, made his death more chilling.

Young Spock/Adult Spock hit upon a theme that many moviegoers will appreciate: bigotry. Suspend the notion that Vulcans are too logical to be caught up in petty stuff like bigotry and Spock’s reactions become more readable. His rejection of the Vulcan Science Academy reveals his rebellious side. The scene with Amanda is wonderfully played by Winona Ryder, and is conveys great warmth, a good juxtapose to the initial frenetic Kelvin sequence.

Kirk Kid/Bar is the sequence that either makes or breaks the audience empathy for Kirk. In this age of anti-heroes, Kirk necessarily is cast with a rebel without a clue, but instead being simpletonish with his “fuck you’s”, Kirk is more brash than rebellious. The Pine-Kirk father/son dynamic is established on indecisiveness.

Academy sequences are good, establishing McCoy’s ‘older brother’ to Kirk, and sets up a realistic Uhura-Spock relationship. Uhura is the ‘heart’ of Trek, and this movie has her doing much more than simply gasping when Scotty brings in his fatally-injured nephew. Nice to see an assertive female portrayal, and her interplay with Kirk and Spock is good.

First Narada sequence could have been more menacing; Nero almost sounds like a piker rather than a villain with his “Hello Christopher” casualness. There’s the menace of the next-door neighbor being a nice guy…until he’s arrested for being a serial murderer. Nero doesn’t have that ambiance, and it conflicts with his psychotic fugue bursts in the initial Kelvin sequence. The brood-explode personality character doesn’t come across here. Also, I thought the MacGuffin part of the plot was exposed too early here…should’ve waited until Kirk meets Spock Prime.

The orbit dive sequence was understated, with a useless Lt. Olsen reinforcing the lame “idiot in the ranks” plothole that is overused in Trek. The macho idiot foil already was established by Mr Creampuff the security guard, so why do it twice? Absolutely useless. Also, Sulu should have been allowed to shine his character more with an extended sword fight sequence (a personal bias I have after watching hundreds of hours of chambara cinema). The redeeming quality of this sequence is that Kirk and Sulu save each other’s lives. When they hit the transporter pad and shattered it, many in the theater exclaimed “wow!” or something to that effect.

Chekhov’s beam-out scene was delicious, watching a new ensign feel self-empowered and acting on it by rescue-beaming Kirk and Sulu. It’s a fun scene for one of the supporting cast. I had to LOL at the computer’s inability to voice recognize his authorization; I guess they’ve gone backwards in VR software since the 1990s, where VR software could already distinguish between V’s and W’s. Guess this is just a bit of comic relief.

Vulcan destruction was totally inaccurate. Assuming Vulcan is like Earth, then it is liquid about 10-20km down, so that an explosion/implosion would shatter the crust and create blobs of molten metal/rock for 99% of its mass. Such superheated magma/core wouldn’t dry-freeze in space in a manner of seconds. A more realistic implosion would involve a shattering of surface, and then the inward ingression of near-Sun bright interior, almost akin to Elder Spock’s destruction of the nova. No sci-fi movie has ever got this right, and Trek missed this one completely.

Death of Spock’s mom was a shocker. Nice wraparound when Sarek admits marrying her out of love. The Sarek-Spock relationship lacked the conflict of the TOS version, which I always thought was more melodramatic than realistic.

Uhura’s “tell me how I can help you” sequence in the turbolift was very emotional for me, and really portrays the depth and maturity of her character and the steadfastness of her love for Spock.

Pine’s capture and torture was quirky. I caught several angry protests when I suggested that this sequence was analogous to waterboarding. The inclusion of the insect in the throat was superfluous to plot and seemed to be a steal from Khan. Nero much more in character here as a conflicted man whose vengeance had twisted him.

Scotty was pure comic relief, but it was a nice touch to give him a little person sidekick as a foil. Every Luke needs his R2D2… I did like how ‘jumpy’ Scotty was; freneticism was a characteristic I thought was lacking in the original.

Kirk meeting Elder Spock was ruined by the “bullshit” line. The scene started out with a very heavy emotional context with the requote from Kahn “I’ll always be your friend”…and Kirk’s BS line kills it then and there. The rest of what could have been a very touching scene is reduced to plot revelation rather than character revelation. A vital sequence to the film and to the Trek fans…drained.

Kirk vs. Spock brawl on bridge was very well done, one of the best-acted scenes in the movie because it sustained emotional intensity without resolving into hyperbole. The close-ups prior to the explosive fight worked very well to show how Spock was amping up before bursting with rage.

Kirk and Spock on Narada worked on several levels. We’re left with a Spock who just resigned his captaincy, who feels a huge amount of self-doubt. Kirk provides the solution and the confidence to restore Spock’s faith, which is something vital to the dynamic of the two characters. This makes Trek tick. So many times, one or the other has to rescue his counterpart from the emotional abyss, and the audience is treated to what may be the genesis of their deep camaraderie here. It brought to mind Spock’s ‘healing’ of Kirk after Edith Wheeler died (I know that goes back a long way). There is a sequence where the two are looking at each other which totally channels Nimoy and Shatner’s TOS character’s almost telepathic reads of each other.

Narada destruction sequence was understated, and again what could have been a nice battle sequence is anticlimactic. The appearance out of warp of the Enterprise to ‘rescue’ the Jellyfish was a nice ‘heroic’ sequence, but then the rest of the scene resorts to little more than watching the Narada get sucked down the drain.

Big fuckup at the end by soloing Kirk for medals. Spock was the one who destroyed the rig, and he doesn’t get decorated? Nonsense! Even Star Wars got it right in the ‘reward finale’ scene where the three majors get paraded. Here, it’s just Kirk…and that is totally hollow, more empty than full. Nice touch with Elder Spock though, so the scene wasn’t a total waste. Seeing both Kirk and Spock get their gold stars would’ve been more engaging. Wasn’t Spock a highly distinguished graduate? Ignoring Spock’s contribution is like giving Bush Sr a medal for Iraq while arguing that Colin Powell was simply a sidekick who didn’t contribute anything meaningful.

Final scenes with Spock and Elder Spock was flat. This is probably the last time we’ll see Nimoy on-screen, and to have it end with a “good luck” instead of “live long and prosper” was definitely warm soda. He’s telling Spock to be more human, when it’s obvious that this Spock is much more human than the original Spock, seems really lame. Spock nearly beat the crap out of Kirk, and he wasn’t fired by Pon-Farr…and now his elder self/mentor tells him to get with it? Nah! Of course, this will be lost on non-Treks, who will see it for what it is, rather than what it isn’t. Ending with the ‘flying off into space’ motif was too Hollywoodish.

Overall: Trek fills out its two hours pretty well, not too boring, not too full-bore. Lots of scenes to pluck on the heartstrings of Trek fans, and for non-Trek fans, I cannot speak, but I can assume that this will be engaging.

The new Enterprise is always a conversation piece necessarily embedded in any Trek venture, and the design of this one is pretty good. The new E is 1000m long, three times the TOS E, which creates a new sense of scale. The SFX shots of the Enterprise are breathtaking rather than slick, and in a couple of cases could have been drawn out more. McCoy’s “Jim, you gotta see this!” followed by a five-second glimpse of Spacedock just doesn’t match up. The massive nacelles are a nice touch, because it gives an appearance of power rather than fragility. Too often, power is represented by phasers and photons, rather than propulsion. The Enterprise also has the sleek curves of the TNG-era ship, rather than the angularity that has predominiated Trek ship designs over the post TNG era.

The “New” Trekverse is neither addition or subtraction from canon. Considering that this ‘alternate reality’ isn’t going to be explored by 78 episodes, and then almost 400 more episodes, the radical changes to canon aren’t that radical. Of course, with a Hollywood adapt, any canon must suffer a significant alteration, otherwise it’s redundant and weak. So they killed Vulcan, which is definitely the most profound impact on Trek canon. If it were me, I would have had them kill Earth, and have the survivors retreat to Vulcan, which would have been much more impactful. That would have been a quantum shift in canon which would have made for a more intense Trek. After the movie, I heard several people say the sequel should be ‘let’s bring back Vulcan’ and I immediately thought “oh great, another Search for Spock!”

Uhura-Spock is the other major mixup of canon. This one works. You get a romance on so many levels. On the pad before Kirk and Spock leave for Narada, the two are on each other like teenagers. Yet, there is a gravitas to their romance, wonderfully portrayed when Vulcan is destroyed. Also, Uhura’s influence over Spock is nice touch, as it jumps out of the male-dominated romances of Trek and puts the pair on equal footing.

This isn’t your father’s Trek, but then again, it still isn’t a modern Trek. It’s about ten years behind. All the guys have crewcuts…they might as well be bankers rather than officers and enlistees. They certainly aren’t ‘the people’, idealized or otherwise. They’re the greys; the elites who are too muddled to be either black or white. There isn’t any characters who are edgy. The antagonist is a known race. Why is it either the Borg or the Rommies who are the bad guys? Why not a new threat?

A summation would be that this movie is a draft, rather than a completed work. The next one will be a completed work.

205. Milo - May 9, 2009

This was the biggest crap pile and yet totally amazing all at the same time. I think for myself I have a love/ hate relationship with this new Star Trek.

I’m not so big on the fact that we will be following some alternate universe from now on and miss the original universe, like wise what happened to Vulcan especially really ticks me off! Killing off Kirk and Data were no where near the gravity of this insult!

On the other hand, it has some great parts to it and some great performances by Quinto, Urban, Nimoy and Pine.

The music sucked. Not totally, but it should have had more of the original Trek music to it and it didn’t. Likewise I’m not a fan of this new Enterprise.

In respect to my old Star Trek, I’d give this new thing 6 out of 10 stars. If I wasn’t a die hard fan, I’d probably give it close to 8 out of 10 stars.

206. greenjeans - May 9, 2009

“Yellowdog – I am sorry, but Coca-Cola and McDonald’s do not exist in Gene Roddenberry’s universe. If you can so easily accept product placement, then I seriously question your credibility as a Star Trek fan.”

But Levis and Kraft marshmallows exist in TREK’s era (per TREK V). Why whouldn’t other brand names? And let’s not forget Michelob beer in TREK IV. I’m no Abrams supporter by a long shot, but this complaint is just silly. To think brand names that have lasted the lest of time will suddenly vanish in STAR TREK’s period is more than a little extreme.

207. VulcanNonibird - May 9, 2009

My opinion on two topics:

The destruction of Vulcan: was truely too fast – such a tiny black hole as this drop of “red matter” would’ve created would at least need weeks or months to destroy a planet – but that way the writers must have come up with some other – most likely cheesier way to kill Amanda and give Spock this quite vital character-building moment. As Winona fan I would’ve loved to see Amanda survive – but Noni dies in all Sci-Fi movies – but on Alien she was a robot and could switch to secondary power…lol. But the Enterprise can still switch into the famous parallel universe…

brand-names: I think Coke is universal – you order today a coke and don’t care who made it – so I think this one was okay. But I truely hate the Nokia product-placement – that was so useless. That scene itself was quite cheese – I would’ve loved to see more of young Spock instead….

208. Mike G. - May 9, 2009

I saw the Star Trek Movie Friday night. I thought the acting except for Chekov was exciting and fun. The special effects were very good. The Engineering section looking like the steam power plant of a world war 1 dreadnaught was pretty silly. The weight penalties of steam power are too high for airplanes much less starships. The turbines are going to need more than 99% efficiency to reach warp speed. I haven’t seen anything as “Disney” implausible as escaping a black hole with an explosion since, eh, Disney’s Black Hole. I don’t know how I’m going to deal with erasing large swaths of the original stories. Putting a period on the great theme that Star Trek is would be an acceptable alternative to gussying up the franchise for the ADD generations. As a good capitalist though I know Paramount owns the rights and I support their right to make money at the cost of my sentiments. I hate them for it though.

209. El Chup - May 9, 2009

Hmmm, where do I start?
I left the cinema yesterday afternoon not knowing whether or not I liked or truly despised this movie. However, my main feeling as I walked out was that it simply didn’t feel like Star Trek, and that worried my greatly. I’ve been a fan for over 30 years, since early childhood, and to not have the feeling for the first time ever was very disappointing. However, I’ll deal with that at the end of my review.
I think the best way to summarise my feelings about the picture would be to list the good and the bad:-
THE GOOD
– The special effects were stunning, particularly the opening battle. There can be no question about that.

– I warmed quite quickly to the exterior of the new Enterprise – at least when shown at a distance anyhow.

– I liked some little touches in the movie, such as how the Kelvin’s communicators looked like the old TOS ones, Scotty’s tribble (complete with the correct trilling), Kirk’s apple and Majel’s voice on the ship computer.

– As a general action movie there was enough in it to keep the pace chugging along throughout without moments of boredom.

– The main Starfleet uniforms were great. AT a distance they looking just like TOS uniforms. I also got a kick out of the similarities between Pike’s admiral’s uniform and Kirk’s TMP version.

– I liked the Nero character, even if he got little to do. I would have liked to see more of him and learn more.

– I liked the fact that Nero’s ship interior was relatively consistent with the look of the Scimitar from Nemesis. It made me believe that the ship originated from the same sort of grudgey, lower class mining background that Shinzon did, thus I could accept that Nero was from the post-Nemesis era.

– Nimoy!! What can you say. I was overjoyed to see him on screen again. Some people posting reviews have suggested that he was out of character in his scenes. I disagree. In fact I felt that this was the closest we had seen to the Spock I remember since Star Trek V. Nimoy seemed to go through a phase of having Spock be extremely grumpy in TUC and Unification and it was refreshing to see a return to the character I properly remember from the golden days of Trek. Hats off to Leonard to still pull it off. He easily acts Quinto off the screen, but then I feel a bit sorry for Quinto having to play alongside the original, unlike his cast mates, especially Leonard as of all the characters I’d say that Spock is probably the one most unique to the original actor. Nimoy just has something about him, and almost alien quality that inhabits the character that, quite simply, only he can do.

– A great score. Top notch, although I would have like to hear the fanfare earlier on, but I understand why it came at the end.

– Khan style eels! Great stuff.

– Not exactly part of “the good” per se, but a lot of people moaned about Spock & Uhura’s lovebird act. Have to say I had no problem with it keeping in mind that these are alternate versions of the characters. In fact that only thing I was curious about was how it came to be as otherwise there wasn’t much point it in being present.
THE BAD
– Recasting. Now, I promised myself well in advance that I had gotten past the recasting of iconic roles, helped in part by Nimoy’s endorsement and, more importantly, the alternate universe which allowed me to treat them as different characters. But despite the throw away line about alternate realities it was clear to me that the movie was trying to remind me on a regular basis that I was supposed to be watching Kirk Spock and McCoy and I was supposed to accept the youngsters, many of whom are younger than me (not that I should let that prejudice me), were the same iconic characters that I had grown up with over 30 years. For me, I just couldn’t do it. Maybe I am like Kirk in TUC, I’m struggling to get past my prejudices and move on, but for me the original characters are more than a few episodes and movies, they have been friends to go to when times were bad. Friends who allowed me some escapism. Friends who taught me about morality and difficult questions in life. The people that brought those characters to like are those characters. A character is more than what is written on a script page, it is also part of the living breathing person that plays him or her. For instance, Karl Urban did indeed give one of the best performances in the movie. But I just couldn’t believe it was McCoy, all I could believe was that it was a young Starfleet officer doing an impression of McCoy.The same for the others, all good actors, especially the wonderful Simon Pegg, but I just couldn’t help wanting to see my beloved personalities of old. I think it will take me a long time to get beyond that, if I ever do.

– The set designs. The Kelvin was ok and I could believe it was pre-TOS. However, I despised other sets, most significantly the Enterprise interiors. Abrams has spoken about his desire to do what Dick Donner did on Superman: The Movie, have the believability factor to what was on screen. Versimilitude Donner called it. Well here Abrams makes a fatal mistake. We aren’t just talking about a superhero in a costume, with everything else looking like 20th Century Earth, we are talking about how society will look over 200 years from now. In that respect I cannot accept that the Enterprise needs manual handles to go to warp and an absurd looking engine room that looks like the lower decks of a World War II submarine. Aside from a few trendy touchscreens thrown in, everything else on the Enterprise looked years behind the TOS version, and even looked less advanced than the NX-01, which was are to believe still existed as we know it in this reality. Not convinced in the slightest and Abrams better think carefully about this one for the sequel. It’s absurd that will such a budget that couldn’t create something truly futuristic looking, especially since they had gone to all that trouble of making the exterior of the ship more advanced than its sixties counterpart.

– Plot explanations. I thanked god I had read Countdown because without that the plot of the movie seemed very silly. A Romulan comes after Spock because his homeworld was blown up and he somehow blames Spock for not sorting it out in time, all of which we find out in a couple minutes. Great. That’s it? So basically we are to empathise with Nero and understand his plight? Do me a favour. I couldn’t feel for him after such a small and thrown away explanation and saw the character as nothing more than Bana playing a crazy. I would have loved to have seen more. With that the soul was totally ripped out of the movie for me and Nero was just another bad guy of the week. Ironically the one thing I didn’t have much of a problem with was Nimoy being on Delta Vega at the right moment. With the other plot holes, this coincidence didn’t really matter to me.

– Lens flares and shakey cam. I had read complaints about this but went into the movie open minded. I had no problem with it during the Kelvin scenes, but by the time the movie was half way through it began to annoy me. I’m a greater hater of shakey cam out of the two, and I am terribly frustrated that Hollywood directors think that the audience want to see these tired camera tricks all the time. This moviegoer doesn’t and I’m tired of seeing this in every action film I see these days. One of the redeeming features of Indy 4 was that Spielberg shot the movie old style, without shakey cam, and so despite its flaws I find Crystal Skull a lot easier to watch than movies like Iron Man. I like to see what is happening, not get a headache. But then I guess Abrams was just trying to be one of the cool kids.

– Kids in charge of the Enterprise. Talked about many times so I won’t go into detail, but from cadet to Captain? And for that matter the whole crew (sans Spock & Scotty) from cadets to senior officers? Utterly, utterly stupid.

– Ben Cross as Sarek. Bloody awful. I wish Mark Lenard was still around.

– Product placement. No, no, no, no. No room for that in Star Trek JJ. What a cheap shot.

CONCLUSION

Despite the recasting and the items under my “bad” list, none of what I mentioned above was enough to make me hate the movie. I could stomach them and suspend disbelief to allow me to watch the movie as “just another movie” and take enjoyment out of it and be entertained. In that respect is was a rip-roaring space action adventure and I would recommend it to any non-fan who likes action films. I can understand why it has gotten rave reviews from non-fans and newer fans alike. It will generate a good return, new fans and a sequel. Paramount have gotten what they wanted.

However, here lies the real problem I have with the movie, which is a serious complaint directed at the new “supreme court”. Abrams and his cohorts, including Nimoy himself, tell us Star Trek is about the characters. A lot of fans have bought into this when seeing the new movie and think that if there is a good arc for Kirk & Spock then that’s all that’s need. I respectfully disagree with this on every level. Star Trek was never about the characters, it was about the human experience, as told through the characters. This is the fundamental mistake with movie. It’s something that people like Ron Moore and, dare I say it, Berman understood about what Roddenberry was trying to do, but Abrams seems clueless in this regard. There was no exploration of humanity in this movie and no hint of a morality play. For this fan, that’s just not good enough. I was never a fan of Star Trek because I liked to see ship battles or fancy devices. It was about, for me, the social issues it made me think about. It was the thing about Star Trek that set it apart from things like Star Wars. It had greater depth, more intelligence and more morality than the other things out there. Majel is alleged to have said that Gene would have approved of the new movie, while I hope that he would have I feel that this is doubtful. If you go way back to “The Cage” it is clear what Gene wanted from the show. He wanted to make the audience think. Abrams Trek does not do that. For that reason I felt incredibly let down when I left the cinema. It felt like my intelligent Star Trek had died years earlier and had been replaced by yet another big budget Hollywood action movie for the crowds of lower intelligence out there that has simply had the Star Trek name slapped on it. Well, that’s what sells these days so I understand it. But I am just deeply upset that the market has turned this way and ripped the heart, or more importantly, the brain, out of my beloved Star Trek.

You see without the intelligence Star Trek is just like everything else….and nothing else has lasted this long as a result. I don’t see why people can’t see that. This movie will generate a couple sequels of big action. Paramount will make short term money on its reboot. But it will die out much sooner than the original did, because this nuTrek is far more a product of its time than TOS ever was and simply doesn’t have elements to withstand changes attitudes over the years.

Abrams has a chance to recapture this old fan with the inevitable sequel. He just needs to explore the human experience again – and there is no reason why this cannot go hand in hand with a big budget action film. I implore him to do it as then he really will have done justice to the Roddenberry legacy.

5/10

210. Mike - May 9, 2009

There is nothing wrong with Paramount making a profit, however this did not require that J.J. et al. produce an unrecognizable UFP where corporations exist and therefore money also exists. Alternate reality or not, Gene Roddenberry made it perfectly clear that money does not exist in the Federation – there is no need for it. Star Trek was a vision of the future where humanity overcame racism, greed, poverty, needless violence and disease. This movie seems to spit in the face of that message; the most important message of Star Trek.

I hope the spirit of Star Trek’s past rests in peace. This facade is Star Trek in name only and nothing more!

211. Nick - May 9, 2009

The adventure continues in every sense of the word with great characters returning to save Earth (et al) once again!

Like so many others, I agree … we can only look forward to the next adventure as this truly exceptional movie is so tightly packed that we are left yearning for more.

At 35, I have personally have been a fan since a very young age, and very much a fan of the original cast, whether original TV series or movie.

Being no major canonite I enjoyed every moment in what was essentially a most fulfilling and enthralling re-establishment of Gene Roddenberry’s original vision. Gene predicted (or at least hoped for) someone to build on his work with Star Trek … and in my view, that has happened.

I wouldn’t presume to offer an opinion on special effects or sets which to me were only in the background. In every instance the énvronment was perfect to the story … at least that was what I was intent on following,

The acting was excellent. It is hard to draw comment to any individual in the sense that they all did great work to support the story and one-another. So, my most special character moments were driven by the story …. I thought the Spock and Ulhura line was excellent … it really optimised the depth of both characters … deeply caring and committed.

Having Leonard Nimoy as part of the production was very special. I would not presume to speak for the man, but I can only imagine that he might have enjoyed the arc of the Spock character in the movie, especially the real perspective placed on a man/vulcan … but a ‘man’ none the less. And I use that term loosely as Ben Cross’s character “Sarek” delivered even more empathy and depth to characters we previously potrayed as two dimensional and perhaps a little too cold.

I’d just like to say how very grateful I am to all the people involved in this movie. At least for me, you have delivered a very special extra instalment in the adventures of characters I have loved and cherished for a number of years.

Thank you. 10/10

212. El Chup - May 9, 2009

#210 Entirely agree.

213. Dom - May 9, 2009

169. Mike: ‘THIS IS NOT STAR TREK How dare anyone call this Star Trek?’

I dare. So do literally millions of others.

‘I am most outraged by the presence of product placements…PRODUCT PLACEMENTS…Nokia, Budweiser.’

As Abrams pointed out, Star Trek had come to be seen as a weird ‘other universe’ rather than a viable possible future of our race. Why shouldn’t companies still make things? By all accounts Tricorder is a brand-name, for example. Are you saying that all innovation and manufacturing should be solely the responsibility of the government and the military? That’s disturbing! It’s simply that we’ve never seen much of civilian human culture in Star Trek before.

‘Am I to believe that 23rd century Earth is still driven by profit?’

We know it was. In TOS, they referred to as getting paid. Pike in The Menagerie/The Cage discusses becoming an Orion trader. Trading for what? Jelly beans? People do jobs to get paid to live to move up in the world. The only confusion caused about it in TVH:STIV was that the characters weren’t used to handling cash. Even now, a lot of us use credit and debit cards and run bar tabs.

It’s a misconception by TNG-era fans that the TOS era didn’t have finance. Indeed, the makers of DS9 routinely joked about the not getting paid remark in ST:FC, because a Federation without money can’t exist. Even if they live in their cosy pseudo-Soviet utopia, how are they supposed to handle economics with the Klingon Empire, the Romulan Star Empire, the Ferengi and so on? End of the day, it was a joke remark in ST:FC that certain people took too seriously!

‘I suppose the sequel will have the crew of the Enterprise battling the Borg. Except in this new, alternative reality the Borg will be a group of cybernetic beings created by Microsoft.’

I actually like that idea! The iBridge will kick their butts! ;)

‘The destruction of Vulcan is monumentally unacceptable. J.J. and team might as well have destroyed Earth. If you know anything about Star Trek, then you know that the destruction of Vulcan is nothing less than a total assault on the very essence of Star Trek. J.J. and team have changed canon so that none of the events that we are familiar with ever really happened!’

That statement is just so monumentally wrong, I don’t know where to begin! There are still Vulcans, there is still Vulcan culture. The Vulcans themselves are fundamental to Star Trek, not where they live. How often did the planet Vulcan actually appear directly in any Star Treks post-Enterprise era? IIRC, once in TOS, once in TAS, four times in the movies and once in TNG.

All of these appearances can be transplanted to the Vulcan colony, except Yesteryear which is in the past of ST09 anyway. Journey to Babel’s subplot about Sarek’s illness will no longer be an issue, although the main plot will remain much the same. Really, things don’t change that monumentally in the scheme of things, except perhaps that the loss of the Intrepid in The Immunity Syndrome will be that much more devastating!

‘I know that there are those of you who will say I am nitpicking’

Ranting more like!

‘but the truth is for thousands of fans Star Trek represents a fundamental philosophy that is to be cherished.’

And there’s nothing done in the new film to change that. Again, your viewpoint seems very TNG. TOS is a very different kettle of fish.

‘Dismantling the meaning of Star Trek so that Paramount can make more money is nothing more than a blatant assault on the universe Gene Roddenberry created.’

And Roddenberry didn’t create Star Trek to make money? Read some interviews with him from the 1960s and 1970s. It’s a billion-dollar multimedia franchise. It’s always been about making money! Do you really think Paramount do Trek as some sort of charity?

‘J.J. and team promised that they would take care to respect these characters that we are all so familiar with and the universe they inhabit.’

Well, the casting was dead on, the costumes are similar, the ships are much the same, the characters by the end of the film have grown in to the ones we love.

‘Well…they failed at their task,’

Millions of people are disagreeing with that view.

‘or perhaps they just lied’

And perhaps that’s just libel.

‘in order to get Trek fans out to theaters.’

Most trekkies were going to go anyway, even out of morbid curiosity. The phenomenal trailers were enough to drag most people to the cinema.

‘I choose to completely disregard this movie as nothing but an attempt to appeal to the degenerated iPod generation’

I’m from the 1970s-1980s so-called MTV Generation and I own an iPod, as do most people of my age (mid-thirties).

‘preoccupied with musings of sexual indiscretion’

And the TOS characters were so sexually discreet! :0

‘and whom possess an attention span limited to CGI.’

Whatever that means!

I suggest that you go out and buy the new Star Trek Remastered DVDs and watch them, because it’s clear from your little rant that you don’t really know much about the original Star Trek and its characters. Your opinions reflect a broad knowledge in the sense that you have a cultural awareness of the original Star Trek, but obviously haven’t watched it properly, if at all.

Gene Roddenberry’s late wife agreed to work on this film, Leonard Nimoy came out of retirement to work on this film. Gene Roddenberry spinning in his grave? I suspect he’d be very happy to see Star Trek back at the forefront of popular culture.

214. Rich - May 9, 2009

I forgot to add my rating: 1/10. Spend your budget on writers and a dialogue coach and maybe not on CGI.

I won’t get into the cannon/non-cannon/continuity flaw stuff. The film is an alternate timeline. I get it. But I used to get bored with the mirror universe during the show as well.

Whoever likened this to Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull fits my thoughts exactly. Both shed the core writing that made predecessors good in favor of CGI. If I want CGI I’ll play video games.

215. KPC - May 9, 2009

I just watched the movie last night, and it was by far a really fantastically good film. It was to a packed house on the east coast of Canada, people cried, laughed, and clapped at the end, it was an inspirational movie.

My critique of the movie is not much as I only watched it once, and wanted to enjoy it. But here we go.

Opening sequence – An eye grabber, and a tear jerker. I know from cannon, that this should not have happened this way, but it was really well done. And done in a way that made it both profound and humbling, as once I saw his dad die, I knew things were going to be different. If it did not happen this way, then all we would have is a movie like Star wars Episode one, which turned me off of star wars. I am glad that they did this, as right then and there I had a movie that was new, refreshing, and full of hope.

The only real bad thing about the ship was the engine room. I agree that a star ship would probably have all the industrial stuff there, but there should have been a sort of enginneer command center, were Scotty did his work from. If he had to go fix something then we would see the industrial side of the ship. (for those who say that a star ship would not have such parts, all I can say is ST VI had chefs still making food from scratch in a kitchen that looked like it was from a aircraft carrier.) So, an engineer command centre would be good.

Most believable ship I have seen with all the lines of the original, when you saw it you new which ship that was. (using the throttle to go to warp, was just like Sulu in the third season of the old series, but a much sleeker throttle…nice)

I very much liked the nods to the old series, and the musical score to the film is one that I will go and buy, well done on that.

The destruction of Vulcan, well it was done… too fast, would have liked to see more of them get off of the planet, but again, the director could not drag it out. It was done with respect and dignity, and for that I am glad.

Starfleet academy – most believable to date. Would have liked to see more from the academy.

Leonard Nimoy – well done. He added credibility to the story that was being told and as I star trek fan for 25 years and my dad one for 40 years, we both agreed that he did an excellent job, and added the necessary touch to the movie to make it believable in the star trek universe. Well done, and the writers are correct it only worked with him in the story. Would have liked to have more of him in the movie, but understand that the movie I would have wanted to see with more of him, would have been another 2 hrs, but I would have paid for it and watched it.

Anyone notice pike uniform at the end – please do not bring those back. As well pike went from Capt to Admiral. Thanks keeping with tradition and getting rid of the commodore rank, all the commodores in the old series were a bit crazy.

In the end a wonderful, action packed movie, with great characters, humor, and hope. I hope that there are 10 more like this. I will be watching it again this summer. (is it possible to have the DVD release with all the cut scenes added into the movie?)

216. KPC - May 9, 2009

Forgot to rate the movie, 9/10 – reason for the nine is one – Vulcan could have been a bit longer, more Spoke prime – 2- engineering – 3 – Why is this bad guy really out for revenge against the Federation, not really tied in well, but we did get it

But those three things only account for a minus 1, so not that major in my estimation.

217. Fallen_62 - May 9, 2009

@213 – I love you ;) Nice response, much better than I could have written myself, but exactly what I was thinking/feeling.

218. BaltarStar Galactica - May 9, 2009

Am I so old that I’ve outlived my usefulness?

I saw the film on IMAX. Caveats to my thoughts: I was a little too close–the place was packed and all the good seats taken and I had gotten there an HOUR before showtime. Some of the close-ups looked bad on the giant IMAX screen but this wasn’t shot on IMAX film. So I need to see this on a normal movie screen, and I intend to very soon.

The reason for my Spock quote at the top: I felt the movie was too fast. Too quick. So unrelenting that I couldn’t get inside the picture to hold on to a character long enough to have an emotional reaction. Where was the character build up to make the drama pay off at the end? Like in Wrath of Khan when we see through some well-paced slow scenes the touching friendship between Kirk and Spock and the others.

Kirk — It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. Message, Spock? Spock — None that I am conscious of except of course, happy birthday. Surely, the best of times.

That scene and others like it in the beginning pay off Spock’s sacrifice and death and Kirk’s reaction.

Bones — How do you feel, Jim?

Kirk — I feel young.

In this film we get that awesome opening, right up there with the opening of Star Wars (the original). Then we get what amounts to a clip of boy kirk stealing a car for a joy ride followed by another clip of kirk, now older, in a bar room brawl followed by Kirk joining the academy and it’s three years later. I wanted to feel this lost boy becoming a lost young man. I wanted to feel his pain at not having a father. It was all glossed over.

The same quickie development for Spock. We get one scene of him as a boy getting teased, then he’s older and rejecting the Science Academy and then he’s a commander in StarFleet. All of that happened so quickly, then the action begins, they’re all on the Enterprise, and the pace goes to warp and stays there until the credits.

I admit, I loved the movie. It was kinetic, it looked GREAT. We haven’t had a Star Trek movie that looked and felt like a movie in a LONG time. Let’s be honest, most of them looked and felt like extended TV episodes. I had no problems with the changes. I give them total credit for not doing the typical Star Trek thing at the end that all time travel Treks seem to do, that is hit the reset button so that everything that just happened never happened and everything is set right again. So ballsy. So ballsy to keep those changes, especially what happened to Vulcan. Kudos for that. Star Trek needed a kick in the pants. So for all of that I applaud this movie and I loved it for those reasons.

I just wonder, am I too old? Is that why the fast quick storytelling and unrelenting high octane direction left the character’s at arm’s length? I keep hearing about how the opening battle is this awesome spectacle (and it was) and how in the middle of that, Abrams chooses to follow some random person down a hallway as she gets blown out a hull breach and then the film goes silent and we see her floating in space. That would’ve been affective had he lingered there a bit longer. Instead, within 2 seconds we’re back into the spectacle with no time for the audience (at least me) to hold that quiet and terrible image–the consequence of war–and digest it.

I just wish the movie could’ve let me in. I wanted to engage with these characters but I couldn’t. I was just a spectator, watching a video game.

Maybe a second viewing on a normal movie screen will change all that.

219. cyranojones - May 9, 2009

**SPOILERS AHEAD!***

I watched the movie last night with my wife (we are both in our late 20’s), some friends of ours (a couple in their 50’s) and their 16-year-old daughter (who has had minimal Trek exposure). To sum up the experience: ALL of us enjoyed the movie, laughed out loud, jumped in our seats, clapped and cheered. I was one of the folks who was a bit nauseous when Paramount released the first image of the new 1701. What Abrams and Co. have done is create a film that not only reintroduces our favorite family in a manner that really is accessible to the masses, they have set them up for some terrific future adventures. I don’t think it is a fair question to ask whether this film is perfect or not… simply put, it’s far from perfect. BUT, it accomplishes its mission of re-establishing TREK as something worthy of heavy investment. If we the fans want our TREK to continue and be as glorious as it possibly can be, the success of this film is critical. That said, I enjoyed every moment of the picture, and can’t wait for the next.

A few bones to pick:

– I would have gone absolutely NUTS in my seat had we been treated to an arrangement of Goldsmith’s THE ENTERPRISE motif during the reveal shot of the Big E in Space Dock. That said, Giacchino’s work is outstanding throughout.
– Wasn’t offended by the Uhura/Spock dynamic, but would have liked to see a little bit more innuendo or subtext leading up to the turbolift scene.
– Was thrilled with Spock Prime’s appearance – wish the mind meld scene was handled a bit more delicately (ala Sarek & Kirk in TSFS); certainly would have slowed the tempo of the film a bit, but would have added some real emotional gravitas to the story.
– More Nero – thought Bana’s performance was great… wanted a little bit more. Perhaps that’s what we’ll get with the cut scenes on DVD? Would be great to have seen those in context with the film. My wife agreed that seeing a Klingon sub-plot would have confused her further…
– Robau was a bad mutha%^&*er. Probably could have put a hurting on Nero if he was paying attention.
– Would like to see Scotty develop beyond the slapstick just a little bit… I still laughed harder than I have in a long time.
– Loved the beauty shots of the Big E, but still sensed that feeling of CGI… maybe a little model action wouldn’t hurt next time around?

Can’t WAIT until STII…

220. Frank Lomax - May 9, 2009

10/10

This movie was everything I hoped for and more. What annoys me more than anything is when fans nitpick continuity, timeline, canon, and all that crap. Why can’t they just appreciate a great movie for what it is and stop over analyzing every second of what happens on the screen? I <3 what JJ and staff have done and I think we all should be expressing our sincere thank yous and deepest gratitude for this new masterpiece… without question the best of the Star Trek movies. It will be hard to top this if a sequel is done, but perhaps JJ and staff could at least equal this effort.

221. TheEvolved1 - May 9, 2009

I loved it! Its hard to say for sure but im gonna go out on a limb and say its probably the best one they have ever made. Its a close call between this and TWOK but I have to say I maybe enjoyed this one a little bit more.

Going into this film I was a hardcore TOS Trek fan all the way. I would consider myself a purist because I didn’t want to see anything changed with this movie. However, as time went by and more trailers came out I became pumped for this and knew it was going to be awesome. JJ did an amazing job with this one and I expect great things for the sequel as long as he is still involved. I think all the new actors did an amazing job with their roles. I think Spock and Bones were right on the money it was so incredible. The only complaint I have about Spock is the whole Uhura love interest thing. He never would have been so open about it like he was late in the film. He wouldn’t have even tried to ask Kirk to pass the message to her. Pine did an amazing job on taking the Kirk character and making it his own, and not trying to do a William Shatner Kirk.

The film is defiantly for everyone whether you are a Trek fan or just someone looking to see a good movie. It gives you enough of a feeling that you have questions about who these characters are and want to know them. For the fans it was awesome how throughout the movie they had little tidbits and jokes that you would only pickup on if your a fan.
* possible Spoiler* I loved the little reference to enterprise when they meet Scotty and the homage to Star Trek IV. * /spoiler*

I am defiantly going to have to see this movie again and again. In closing I would just love to thank JJ and the cast of Star Trek for bringing back the memories and giving life back to Star Trek. You guys did an amazing job and kept the spirit of Gene’s vision alive.

222. Capt Mike of the Terran Empire - May 9, 2009

On a Scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being realy bad and 10 being fantastic i give it an 11!!!. This was by far the best Trek Since trek 2 and even better. Starting out with the U.S.S kelvin getting into it with the narada was fantastic and seeing what nero did to the Capt was just so sad but set the tone as to how much of a bad guy we had in Nero. The Emotional scene we had with George Kirk being in command was powerfull and seeing the Birth of one Jim Kirk was just incredable and seeing how he was named was great. it brought a tear to my eye seeing how george Kirk Sacreficed himself to save the crew. With that kind of start i knew we were in for one wild ride. the bar scene was great and kinda finney. Kirk being kirk he took it to them. The scene with the Big E on earth was great. meeting Bones and hearing how he got that name was great. I can go on an on but this movie was just incredable. the only thing i did not like about this Movie was the use of induresteal sites for the Engeneering section. that just did not look right and it did not feel like we were on the Big E. but the Bridge section was great and the turbos was fine as well. The rest of the Actors did a fantastic job. Mr Checkove was funny but he did it in a smart way and what can be said about Scotty. great. Sulu was great as well and that sword fight was awesome. but the best was Mccoy as i think Urban had Deforest in him helping him out.All of the things they did in the move that paind hommage to the Tos was great. Kirk eating an apple in the Simulater sating he did not like to lose was wonderfull. Made me think about the Admrial in Trek 2 on the Genesis planet when he told Savik that. Bones saying to Spock are you out of your Vulcan Mind. All in all this is one hell of a movie and J.J and the Court should be commended for a fantastic job. Can’t wait for the Next Trek Movie from the Court.

223. Billy Bobby - May 9, 2009

213

‘Am I to believe that 23rd century Earth is still driven by profit?’

We know it was. In TOS, they referred to as getting paid. Pike in The Menagerie/The Cage discusses becoming an Orion trader. Trading for what? Jelly beans?

Orion was not part of the Federation. This was mentioned in Journey to Babel. That’s how Orion was able to have money and green slave women.

224. Closettrekker - May 9, 2009

Wow. Let me say that again. Wow. I haven’t had this much fun with a film experience since I was a child. In fact, my biggest complaint with the whole thing was the audience going overboard with applause while I was trying to absorb it all.

I went into the film quite enthusiastic, but expecting to be bothered by a few plot elements in particular—-first and foremost, Kirk’s ascension to command. Now, perhaps it is because I had already accepted it over the last few months as just one of those things, but I barely gave it a thought during the film. Had I a moment to dwell upon it in the theater, my reaction to Pike’s order (designating the young Kirk “first officer” in his absence) would most likely have been an elaborative spin on that of Commander Spock, but the story’s pace carried me on to the next stage of this thrilling ride, with no time for such quibbles. By the time he goads Spock into the trap provided by regulations (of which our beloved Spock of course needs no reminder from him) and assumes command—-the truth is—-I could not help but want him to!

This film was brilliantly casted, and boy did it need to be. The action sequences were terrific, but make no mistake—-this story was decidely character-driven…precisely as a Star Trek film should be. My favorite scene? There are, upon reflection, alot of them from which to choose, but one which stands out to me is certainly the one at the Vulcan Science Academy. It gave me goosebumps. Quinto nailed that one with a sledgehammer!

As for nitpicking the science of it all, there is no question that ST09 plays fast and loose. Do I care? Hell no! Everything about this experience was fun, and I feel sorry for anyone who wasted a minute on that…as he/she missed a minute of a fantastic experience. This was everything I wanted and easily a little bit more. ST09 kicks in the door and doesn’t let up until the credits roll.

Is it perfect? No. But if it were, a potential sequel would have nowhere to go but down.

This is by far Abrams best work, and Orci and Kurtzman’s best as well. Aside from wanting to yell “shut up” at the people behind and in front of me cheering and applauding when I wanted the only sounds in the theater to be from the film (and perhaps my own heartbeat), my only other complaint at this point is certainly more of a compliment than anything else—-I didn’t want it to end!

225. Crusade2267 - May 9, 2009

As a life long trekkie, going into this film, I was cautiously optomistic. On the one hand, I was happy to go see a new Star Trek film, though I was conflicted about a new cast, a new look, an the fact that I miss TNG.

I have nothing but good things to say about the cast, story, and the film in general.

The charicters are wonderfully defined, and scenes from the movie evoke scenes from TOS and the other films, while adding to them. Sarek’s declaration that he married Amanda for logical reasons evokes Journey to Babel, and yet this Sarek later admits something that Mark Leonards Sarek would (and did) find very difficult to express: the fact that he does indeed have emotions of love.

One of the traps that previous Star Trek adventures have fallen into is not giving the supporting cast enough to do. The TNG films did this to the point that all of them essentially focus on Picard and Data, to the exclusion of any charicter moments for Riker, Worf, Geordi, Troi, and Crusher. The original films are a bit better, but still, Uhura, Chekov, and Sulu are left out a good deal. It is not so in this film. Each of them has wonderful charicter moments, from Chekov’s running through the corridor with boyish enthusiasm, to Sulu’s swordfight, to Uhura’s sparring with Kirk and her relationship with Spock.

The thing that truly made this movie was Leonard Nimoy. Until his appearence, the movie has a very broad, grand feel to it, which seems to borrow heavily from Star Wars, Joseph Campbell, and other things. Once Nimoy Spock appears though, and tells Kirk of their relationship and his destiny to be Captain Kirk, you can really see Kirk come into his own, and the crew come together around him. The Kirk Spock relationship blossoms after this… before this, Spock comes off as a bit of an A**hole, as he is not entirely successful at reconciling his anger, pain, and of course, his war within himself. Nimoy Spock gives us a reminder of all that has gone before, and also the fact that Quinto Spock will be at peace some day… which starts to happen toward the end.

Countdown is essential reading for any Trek fan who sees this film. Like I said, TNG is my favorite, and Countdown was a better sendoff for them than Nemesis. But more than that, Countdown gives you a deeper understanding of Nero’s backstory.

And now, my two criticisms, both of them asthetic. 1: I hate the neck on the new Enterprise. It’s too wide. 2: Visually, there are a lot of bright lights, CGI, etc, which sometimes overwhelm the senses, making it hard to see what’s going on. I believe that Special effects should add to the film, and in most cases they do, but there are some points where there’s too much and it’s distracting.

For the next film, The writers need to focus on tightening up the trio. The Kirk Spock relationship and the Kirk Bones relationship are both well established by this film. However, the Bones Spock relationship isn’t quite there yet. Build that one up in the next film, please!

Finally, I’d like to share two things about my personal experience with this film. First, this was the first Trek film I saw with my wife. We started dating in 2003, so she missed Nemesis. She has always tollerated my Star Trek and Babylon 5 obsession, watched it with me occasionally, even picked out some favorite moments. When we left the theater, she told me “I am now a Trekkie.” She found a version of Star Trek that speaks to her in the way that TNG speaks to me. We both can’t wait for the sequel now!

Secondly, I wore my TOS command costume to the film. It’s a little tradition, whenever I see a Star Trek film on opening weekend, I wear a costume. Anyway, as we were going into the theater, I heard some people snickering, “Oh, look at the guy in the costume.” After the film was over, I got sincere compliments about it. If this film has the power to raise up Die Hard Trekkies in the eyes of the general public, the future of Trek looks bright.

It seems the odd-even curse has been lifted, or at least reversed if Nemesis and this film are any indication. This was a great Trek, and I look forward to Boldly going to many more!

226. captain_neill - May 9, 2009

I have now seen the film twice and I loved it. I was so worried about a lot of the things that JJ Abrams had changed that I was going to hate this film. I could have not been so wrong. I felt that the movie honoured the spirit of Star Trek while making it more acccessible to the non fans. The alternative timeline allows this film to exist parallel to the rest of the Trek timeline and still be in the same universe.

Folks the original time line is not erased, I believe as do some friends that it diverged at the point of Nero’s attack on the Kelvin. The new actors are worthy succesors to these iconic roles. The new actors evoked the original cast trough their performances, Karl Urban in particular was on the money channeling in capturing what DeForest Kelly did.

I loved the little nods to the past, In the Kobayshi Maru simulator I thought Kirk eatign the apple was a nice nod to the secene in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan where Kirk recounts the story while eating an apple. Even the scene where Kirk provoked Spock to get an emotional reaction out of him reminded me of when he had to do the same thing to Spock in “This Side of Paradise” Did anyone else get this?

SPOILER (Don’t read ahead if you have not seen the film)

I was initlally upset that Vulcan got destroyed as it is one of the classic planets of Trek lore. It was one of the few gripes I had with the film. Howeve, thinking back and discussing it with friends the fact that this is an alternate timeline means it still exists in the primary universe and that this film can be treated as a universe B.

One of the other highlights for me was seeing Leonard Nimoy back as Spock. Nimoy is still the man and his performance, as usual, is fantastic.

The special effects are amazing, although I don’t like the new Enterprise design as much as the original version, I believe that this version looked good in motion than it did in that first image I saw of it.

Now I have to admit I was not keen on Engineering filmed in a powerplant, it looked too industrial to me and a little too inconsistent with the other decks of the ship. I prefer the consistency on all decks that all starships had.

The music score was good but not as good as Jerry Goldsmith and James Horner but a very excellent score.

Is it the all time best Star Trek film? No, but it is hard to choose as I love a lot of the past movies.

But it is one of the top ones for me.

8.5 out of 10

227. thumbsdown - May 9, 2009

The Spock-Uhura romance was as credible as Anakin’s sudden and extreme slide into being Darth Vader, which is to say, not credible at all. If your characters are to be believable they have to be realistic, they have to act in ways that we can understand. It’s a sign of poor writing when you neglect the internal logic of a character to make them do whatever you want. When Annakin suddenly becomes a baby Jedi slaughtering Darth Vader I am left saying “Oooookaaaay.” In the same way here we see a scene in which Spock tries to have Uhura assigned to a different ship than the Enterprise, and not long after he’s openly sucking face with her.

Puh-lease. I’m 100% human and even I don’t display such affection in public. Get a ROOM you two.

One of the most important points of TOS and why the Vulcans are there is to make the point that LOGIC isn’t enough. That’s Spock’s job and why he’s an ultimately tragic figure, and he does that in the series by consistently being incapable of making the command choices of Kirk. Poof, that’s all gone now. Spock is now just a pointy eared human. He’s the hero of this movie, he gets the girl, and the new clown like Kirk just gets his ass kicked from one side of the movie to the other (5 times, by my count), once by the new hero of the franchise, Spock. Indeed, Spock IS the new Kirk. You can get rid of Kirk altogether and not lose anything important at all.

I’m actually more disappointed the morning after than I was last night.

228. thumbsdown - May 9, 2009

And Kirk goes from cadet to Captain in what? 2 days? 3 days? A week? Everything in this movie happened WAAAAY too fast to be believable, no doubt because the cynics don’t think modern audiences have an attention span that could withstand a few moments of slow walking and deep breathing. Last night I gave it a 5 out of 10. I think my view will probably stabilize around 3 out of 10.

Sorry. I really wanted to love this movie. I don’t.

229. Dom - May 9, 2009

223. Billy Bobby: ‘Orion was not part of the Federation. This was mentioned in Journey to Babel. That’s how Orion was able to have money and green slave women.’

And how would Chris be able to set himself up in business without money to do so? Shoot a couple of potential rivals and mug their kids for some cash?

The no-money thing was a stupid idea dreamed up as a gentle culture clash joke in ST:FC – stupid because the writers should have realised that certain people would take something like that far too seriously. I suspect that the line wasn’t written by Ron Moore, given that he had Jake an Nog rip the pee out of the no-money thing in DS9!

230. Dom - May 9, 2009

Actually, going back to my original review where I said it was possible to dislike vast tracts of Star Trek yet still be a Trek fan, I find it laughable that people are claiming this film is ‘NOT STAR TREK!’

Like all the vast numbers of Trek shows and movies, it can only reflect certain aspects of the broad spectrum of what Star Trek has featured. This film focuses on the characters, along with the action, the danger and excitement of being in space. It’s the sort of film that will make kids want to be astronauts.

If it seems to lack some of the philosophical underpinnings of the original show (something that TNG and its companion shows dwelled upon far too much, IMHO) that’s because you can’t pack everything into a two hour feature film along with an origin story and franchise-shaking action. I’m sure will be addressed in the next film.

These days, studios treat all films as potential franchises. Like Iron Man, The X-Men and so on, this ‘first’ Trek movie is there to establish the characters and their universe for future sequels. For that matter, ‘Where No Man Has Gone Before’ was hardly the most intellectual adventure either!

This film is a sort-of The Hobbit to The Lord of the Rings. Now all the pieces are in place we’re set for whopping great adventures on a vast scale. In a universe where Vulcan can get fried and Amanda killed and the cowardly reset switch has been eliminated, none of our characters’ safety is assured. The loss of that safety net can only benefit Star Trek.

231. Closettrekker - May 9, 2009

#229—“The no-money thing was a stupid idea dreamed up as a gentle culture clash joke in ST:FC ”

Actually, it was born out of a joke in STIV.

(Paraphrase)
“I suppose they don’t use money in the 23rd Century”.–Gillian Taylor

“Well we don’t.”—Admiral Kirk

232. Crusade2267 - May 9, 2009

The way I see the no money thing is, well in TNG they have replicators, so they can get food, clothing, or any other item they want for free, or at least for so cheap it doesn’t really matter. As members of starfleet, they get free housing, at least while they’re aboard ship. Think, what do you spend most of your money on? I’ll bet it’s rent, utilities, food, clothing, etc. If Starfleet is providing you with all that for free, you don’t need money. TNG charicters do indeed barter for certain items, but that’s usually one-of-a-kind stuff, stuff that can’t be replicated, or things that have personal significance.

In TOS, they didn’t have replicators yet. Food would still need to be produced agriculturally (what do you think Sherman’s planet was for), so there would still need to be some sort of economy to provide the farmers with what they would need to grow crops, and provide the crops to everyone else.

233. Closettrekker - May 9, 2009

96% on the Tomatometer now.

That better than the last 5 Oscar winners for “Best Picture”.

This is surreal.

234. Crusade2267 - May 9, 2009

Oh, I just realized I neglected to put my ranking. I’d say 9.975 out of 10.

Khan’s still the best, but I think this one tied my second favorite, First Contact.

235. captain_neill - May 9, 2009

Although A great film the sudden advancing in the ranks was a little contrvied for my liking.

I believe the film is one of the best but not the best, if that makes snse

236. Dom - May 9, 2009

Hi Closettrekker (231) Glad you enjoyed the film.

‘Actually, it was born out of a joke in STIV.’

Yeah, I mentioned that in post 213. I took it to mean cash! :)

237. captain_neill - May 9, 2009

Please remember that original canon has not been erased, this timeline exists parallel to the canon we know. Vulcan is destoryed in this universe B but this is parallel to the universe we know, Nero’s attack on the Kelvin could allow for the timeline to split of into two universes.

This movie is new canon, the old one still exists.

238. James - May 9, 2009

I went to see Star Trek at the IMAX cinema in Birmingham with three ‘family and friends’ – one of which was a casual fan, the others were non-fans. All of us were blown away by the film – it is easily the best film I have seen since Lord of the Rings – Return of the King.

Special Effects – 10/10
Mind-blowing – the shots of the Kelvin, Enterprise and Narada were astonishingly real. In IMAX, where the screen almost completely fills your peripheral vision, it was like actually being there.

Acting – 8/10
Quinto and Pine performed admirably as Kirk and Spock, but they didn’t blow my mind. Zoe Saldana worked as Uhura, and I actually quite liked the Spock/Uhura thing going on. I always personally felt that as a subtext in TOS anyway, and Spock’s role in it was perfect. John Cho and Anton Yelchin as Sulu and Chekov were OK, but to their credit, they never really got a huge opportunity to shine.

Eric Bana was pretty good as Nero – but the villain, in my opinion, was under-used. His actions were certainly enough to render him hated, but he didn’t have enough screen time to make the hatred personal. But, given that there was no distinctive ‘death’ for him, and that the online ARG continues in the Romulan vein, hopefully there is scope for him to return in the sequel. If he does, more scenery-chewing please!

Bruce Greenwood as Capt. Pike was excellent – he really worked as the father figure that Kirk was so obviously looking for. Second place goes to Simon Pegg as Scotty – although the script put him forward as comic relief, he actually conveyed that kind of mad genius which, for me, was always intrinsic to Scotty. Although special mention should of course go to Leonard Nimoy, who was his usual gravitic self as Spock Prime.

But the scene-stealer was Karl Urban as McCoy – I had to check every time he was on screen, because I could of sworn he was DeForest Kelley. He really hit the nail with McCoy’s acrid sarcasm, and his casual distaste of Spock’s logical demeanour. Full marks.

Direction – 10/10
Abrams really showed his abilities as a director. The camera work was stunning – his use of unusual angles actually worked really well in space, and really emphasised the directionless nature of the void. His focus on the characters made it feel like you were part of the action, rather than just a spectator. He gets my vote for the sequel!

Script – 7/10
The concept was good, and worked well – and the writers took risks, which I enjoyed. The destruction of Vulcan was emotionally devastating, and a big risk to take, although I agree with it totally. This ‘alternate timeline’ they’ve created really opens up opportunities for stories in the Star Trek universe which wouldn’t have been posible before.

The Kobyashi Maru scenario was spectacular – Kirk casually munching that apple! Glorious. The cheesy humour didn’t really bother me either – I’ve put up with plenty worse from Star Trek. Every time I think of damned Holodeck episodes I shudder.

I do have a few gripes, though – firstly, Vulcan seems to be awfully close to Earth in the new timeline. Even at maximum warp, they seemed to get there pretty quickly. Not really sure about that.

Secondly, I’m not sure how Spock Prime was able to witness Vulcan’s destruction from Delta Vega. Delta Vega isn’t even supposed to be in the same system as Vulcan, but Vulcan is as visible to Spock as the Moon is to us. Is Delta Vega a moon of Vulcan?!

And, of course, it seems highly unrealistic that Kirk would be given command of a starship, let alone the flagship, just after graduating from the Academy. Even given what he’d just done, saving the Earth etc., I can’t see how they’d just give him a command.

However, these are largely nit-picks. The script was mainly good, despite a few quangos. And generally the film honoured what has gone before quite well – I picked up on lots of little references to episodes and films, which are too numerous to list. You do get the feeling that this is a ‘Star Trek Begins’, and that the really good film will be the sequel.

Music – 8/10
The music was good, but I would have preferred it if there was more evolution into the Star Trek themes. The main themes were put in over the end credits, but they are substantially themeatically different to the rest of the score. Would have been nice if it blended together better.

Overall, I’d give it a 9/10, and it gets some bonus marks for it’s length. Having long films is all very well, but it kind of hampers the cinematic experience if you’re desparate to pee for the whole third act. That didn’t happen with Trek. It was an excellent film, well worth watching, and I am definitely going to see it again.

239. Closettrekker - May 9, 2009

It’s tough to compare apples and oranges, but I’ll try.

Going into this weekend for me, TWOK was not only the best ever Star Trek movie, but probably the best “B-Movie” of all time.

Well, it’s still the best B-Movie of all time. But as for Star Trek movies in general, I have got to say that ST09 is #1.

That is not a slight to TWOK, as they were never on equal ground. It isn’t fair to Nick Meyer’s 1982 classic, but such is life.

Both are great films, although both utilize contrivances and overly “convenient” scenarios that set up the drama. But as thrilled as I was in the theater in 1982, (and as hard as it is to imagine) I was even more thrilled at this triumphant return.

I’ve thought about this all night. I went into it pretty sure that I was going to enjoy it, but I fully expected to say afterwards that it was my second favorite (surpassing TMP and TVH) Star Trek movie.

I was wrong. It is my favorite. I may not say that after ten years of repeat viewings, but right now—-that’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

Bring on the next one. And in the meantime, I am going to watch this one again and again.

240. Dom - May 9, 2009

237. captain_neill: ‘Please remember that original canon has not been erased, this timeline exists parallel to the canon we know.’

There’s no statement about that either way in the new film. If that’s the way some people need to think about it, then fine.

I enjoyed the film to the extent that I could no longer care less about the sanctity of the original history! If I want that, I have DVDs!

241. Dom - May 9, 2009

239. Closettrekker

I plan on having a Blu-ray player and decent-sized TV in time for the home cinema release of this film. I expect to watch it over and over again. I’m even seeing this film for a second time next week: something I almost never do!

242. Topaz172 - May 9, 2009

I rate it a meagre 6/10

Chris Pine as Kirk….. 8/10 ok he knows how to slouch in the big chair and gave off the exactly right level of unease during the transporter scene

Silar as Spock…. 8/10 I can see him owning the role, but not yet

Urban as McCoy… 10/10 we didn’t see him much but he absolutely nails it. Of the three main characters this is the one where you can say ‘yeah, now I understand all the spock-baiting in the original series.

Uhura…. 10/10 on several levals. A very interesting bit of brand new backstory that places her firmly in the centre of the group

Sulu and Chekov…. 7/10 didn’t do enough to shine

Pegg as Scotty…. 4/10 the accent is right-ish but this wasn’t a scotty I recognise, that was just Pegg doing Pegg

The Plot… 2/10 what plot? this was like watching X-Men Last Stand, a load of set-pieces strung loosely together. Coincidence is the main plot driver and things happen purely to set up the next CGI-fest.

For instance…
Spock maroons Kirk on Delta Vega.. WHY?? Do they not have a brig? And how come there’s a planet right next to them anyway?
Kirk meets Old Spock… who just happens to randomly be in a cave on the planet. Why didn’t Old Spock contact Starfleet rather than just sit there?
Spock gets transported off the Jellyfish at the last instant…WHY? how did anyone know to transport him?

Set design 2/10 This Enterprise is Tardis-like, bigger on the inside, vastly bigger. They appear to have replaced Engineering with a slightly set-dressed industrial brewery (I swear I saw a Budweiser sticker on one vat). The Bridge is likewise a total mess of clutter dressed in glowy white and glass.

CGI 5/10 As can be expected the amount of detail is impressive. The critters are particularly good. The New Enterprise isn’t quite right. The big problem is the battles, instead of the clinical precision of phaser beams slicing off the Reliant’s nacelle the battle effects seem to consist of throwing vast amounts of machine-gun phasers and MIRV’d photons in a way that looks more like an artist has thrown a can of bright paint at a wall rather than an actual battle. The Big E’s phasers appear to just happen with no fixed origin point. New transporter effect ..just rubbish.

cinematography 3/10 on several occasions reflected light hits the camera and obscures what is going on. It has to be deliberate and I just don’t understand WHY. The big bar fight was ruined by a blue lens flare that ran across the screen about a third of the way up.

Real Science 5/10 Saturn is how close to Earth? supernovas that kill galaxies?

Star Trek Science 3/10 Interplanetary Transporters? Warp travel appears to prevent ship combat rather like Star Wars. Nacelles appear to now have an exhaust glow like a Star Destoyer. Vulcan is how many minutes from Earth? Delta Vega moon of Vulcan?

1/10 for Scotty stuck in the plumbing, it wasn’t funny and it wasn’t clever

In summary
Good cast, shame about the rest

243. Dan the Man - May 9, 2009

1. Actors: Great job, the only thing I didnt like was the R2D2/C3PO style relationship between Scotty and his little helper, and the only performance that came off as goofy to me was Checkov. It just seemed like he tried to hard.

2. Enterprise: Just like I knew it would, the olde girl grew on me. By the end of the movie, It wasnt J.J.’s Enterprise..it was just the enterprise.

3: Story: good ole time travel to the rescue. The loss of Vulcan was a shocker, the way most of the crew came to their positions was a little much to take, not since “It gets installed on Tuesday.” have i felt this way.

Over all the changes to the time line dont bother me as a fan, and I think that if you sit in the theater picking out the things that are “wrong” you went a say the movie for the wrong reasons. Its a great movie, a decent story, and all in all I think Star Trek is finally back on the map.

Story: 7/10
Effects: 10/10
Sound: 9/10 (The smattering of true Original series sounds was awesome, but sometime it seemed the movie was just to loud?!

The Enterprise 9/10
The Crew 8/10

244. JD Moores - May 9, 2009

On a scale of 1 to 5, I’d rank the new STAR TREK a 4, not because of any adherence to canon, surprisingly enough, but because of what it does differently. Given I liked it, there’s not much I can say in analysis that hasn’t already been said. It hinges on the accidental time travel (everyone does get that it was accidental, right?) that alters the circumstances of Kirk’s birth, yet to accomplish its goal of appealing to a mass audience and baiting them for sequels, it could only truly rely on Spock and the Vulcans.

Consider that, for those not steeped in Trek lore, the character of Spock or, at the very least, his distinctive appearance is the single most consistent icon of Star Trek for the masses. People that don’t know anything else about the universe and its characters know Spock, and while it may just be coincidence, even the triangular Starfleet emblem is shaped like the tips of Spcok’s ears! So, to convert people to this film and to Trek in general, the audinece has to CARE about Spock. There’s one problem, though – Spock is a character that tries everything in his power to conceal emotion, thereby making his presence as innofensive and potentially unnoticeable as possible. If you changed that inherently, then it wouldn’t be Spock. How do you make a very human and feeling audience relate to a character that, judging by his actions, really doesn’t care or want humans to relate to him at all? How do you make him more than just a neat piece of iconography that still can get old quick if there’s nothing beneath the surface?

You break the facade – as in psychotherapy, you make the character feel things he doesn’t want to feel, in this case so that the audience has something to which they can relate. In this instance, to be true to the character, whether consciously or subconsciously, I believe the writers felt they had to do something drastic to Spock to achieve their goal and make him relatable to mainstream audiences, even if it meant alienating (pardon the pun) certain pre-existing hardcore fans. For those that have seen the film and probably a few that haven’t, you already know what that is. It’s the villain Nero’s goal number one. Thematically, everything in the movie, even that which comes before, relates to or runs parallel to what Spock goes through – the resulting self-doubt, alienation, drive to overcome inherent emotional weaknesses, etc.

I, for one, loved this movie. I still love what came before – I’ll still watch the original cast and their shows over and over as well as the “Next Generation.” The beauty of this film is that it doesn’t make anyone forsake any of that. It’s even part of the story that everything we think we know going in is not going to be invalidated, rather, it will simply be one of two versions of the same universe in the same reality. If I have any legitimate complaints, it has to do with the short-changed villain and the pacing, which in the first half-hour after the very moving USS Kelvin sequence jumps around and leaves out a bit too much. Still, it’s part of creative and narrative choices that I can see being justified in the making, which I believe director Abrams has addressed in interviews already. In any case, what few STAR TREK fans there may be that refuse to embrace this film will be permanently lost or, at the very least, frustrated. This IS
“Star Trek” for the foreseeable future, and even though I thought for a long tiem I wouldn’t be, for my money, I’m okay with that now.

245. thumbsdown - May 9, 2009

JD, I disagree with you completely on Spock. Spock and the Vulcans are there for one good reason: To illustrate the insufficiency of logic compared to the balance of reason and emotion that Kirk represents, which is why Kirk ultimately makes a better leader than Spock. When you make Spock a pointy eared human you lose one of the most important things Trek had to say. Kirk is almost superfluous in this film. And he’s a horn dog who gets his ass beat constantly and doesn’t get the girl.

Radically changing the Enterprise would have been far better than radically changing the substance of the characters, but that’s what they did.

246. thumbsdown - May 9, 2009

I initially thought we were going to see how the original crew which I fell I love with got to be who they are. But this is actually about a completely different crew that was changed by Nero’s meddling, and it turns out that I don’t like them as much as they were written, although the casting and acting were excellent.

247. Ihatenero - May 9, 2009

**Heavy spoilers**

This movie is not for just Trekkies (im sure we all know that). There is plenty of action, plenty of special effects. The first part of the movie is fantastic, and classic trek!

It made me want to know more who is this nero, why he is in the past and what he wants with spock. Im sorry to say Nero sucks as a villian. The narada itself is the true villian, and Nero is the annoying unfortunate thing that needed to be delt with until the Narada becomes destroyed.

Pine played kirk fairly well. There where a couple nods to shatners kirk, however those are very subtle, same with Quintos Spock. Scotty wasnt bad, his little assistant friend reminded me of a cute little baby ewok. Overall the acting was superb in most areas, some places where a little stiff especially the mind meld sequence.

The over all style of the the movie was great, from the lense flare which wasnt a distraction at all, to the special effects that where top notch and well used. The music did create a sense of TOS with is staccato drum rhytms to the slow pacing space operatic scores. However there was an overuse of one track that reminded me too much of anakin and padme love theme.

I would definatly see this move in the theateres many times and on dvd because it does have a lot of potential and alot more PRO than cons. It is enjoyable to watch and listen too, but overall my biggest gripe again is the villians story and his plot.

FX = 5 out of 5
Music 3 out of 5 , Many tracks sounded like the original series music which made it great, but there where elements that sounded like a bad orchestration of star wars it didnt fit well at all.

248. jeff - May 9, 2009

Need I to say anything, Folks go watch this film its not just entertaining its mind blowing and I love it till death. Go ahead and watch it friends.

249. British Naval Dude - May 9, 2009

I want me a gremlin like Scotty had…
“Get down from thar’!”
“What or who the hell is that up there, Mr. Scott?”
“Well it’s… it’s… it’s green!”

Very different actually from what I expected. Very good, though. And indeed darker but yet withoot tha’ customary ruminations o’ morality and life… well, unless ye’ count Spock’s tale o’ how tha’ previous reality wuz’ grand fur’ Kirk and how tha’ previous reality wuz’ being changed fur’ tha’ worse cuz’ o’ Nero or how ye’ have destiny despite quite different circumstances… and a good electrician can really brighten up tha’ place.

A “9” I will give it. But I reserve me tens fur’ films like “Thar’ Will Be Blood” and “Tha’ Outlaw Joesy Whales.”

Tha’ perspective o’ tha’ ships wuz’ well done… and how great be it ta’ peer deep inta’ tha’ hangar bays. Soooo… arrrrrrr tha’ ships smaller or larger than ye’ always thought? Both it seemed dependin’ on tha’ shot.

Finally see tha’ ship upside down as well! Guess Rick Berman had his upsy-daisium in check all those years as thar’ really be no up nor down in space.

Vulcan lost… sad but yet daring since thar’ wuz’ no re-set button in site…

I’ll say Nimoy did dominate his scenes and wuz’ captivatin’… but maybe that’s just our own partiality speakin’. What’d he say at tha’ end? “Thrusters on full.”? Indeed.

And boy did transportin’ seem really harsh! Looks like it hurts! Hurts sooooooo good, though…

Ouch! Quit injectin’ me wit’ that shalaly, Bonesy!

Maybe it wuz’ me but except fur a few shots ye’ didda not have a lot o’ time ta’ ogle o’er tha’ ship… and engineering looked like a tha’ factory where they make me chum-burgers.

Great! Excitin’! I thought it wuz very well done. Which is how I like me chum-burgers.

Me brother did say that now Amok Time! and Jourey ta’ Babel canna happen since Vulcan went bye-bye. But that’s tha’ way tha’ red matter ball bounces.

I want more o’ Scotty and his gremlin!

Arrrrrrrrrrrrr ye’ still readin’ folks’ reviews? Oh, my… It’s a good film and, indeed, “I am relieved.”

Hey- how did this beagle just appear in me bathroom?

Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr…

250. Ihatenero - May 9, 2009

lol british naval dude

251. Admiral Archer's Prize Beagle - May 9, 2009

As spock would say – “Facinating”

Certainly “Star Trek” would not work without the inclusion of Leonard Nimoy as Spock Prime.

—Spoilers ahead—

On the whole I was very pleased and impressed with Star Trek. It was a most enjoyable stand alone film and an admirable Star Trek film.Let me start with the positives.
For me the family of Spock stole the show. Quinto as young Spock was exceptional. Leonard Nimoy was perfect as an ederley and wisened Spock and Ben Cross was an excellent Sarek in short screen time. For the die hard cannon fanatics (of whom I am one to a certain extent) the pivotal appearence of Spock Prime is key to the time travel plotline. Although I could argue that the mind meld with Kirk was a tad rushed I feel that this was neccessary since we saw both Spocks version of events and Nero’s via a flashback.
As for the plotline itself I felt greatly satisfied by the way that time travel was delt with and how this new timeline was created. The opening scene was marvellous and George Kirk’s death will be one to remember. Nero is on a mission of desperate vengance that threatens the entire federation which I found to be an entirely believable bad guy. The Enterprise also had its pros and cons. Whilst the bridge seemed more advanced that TOS engineering seemed to be a definite “enterprise” throwback with the beer vats…I mean antimatter pods and pipelines…I mean air supply lines.
I felt the little details were delt with well also, such as Tricorders, the shuttlecraft (which were very TOS orientated) and Bruce Greenwood’s performance as Pike which oozed Hunter style. The bridge on the whole was acceptable in contrast to engineering. This helped me to understand how this Enterprise could be from 2258 with such advanced controls when engineering is a factory. Perhaps this version of the ship was rushed into service to deal with the Romulan incursion? I was a little confused by Pike wearing a TMP era Admirals uniform but eh, if thats the only little Cannon slip up that I noticed the first time through then hey!

On the other hand this film does have a few negatives. I felt that whilst the Spocks stole the show, Captain Chris Pine just wasn’t up to it. He didn’t play Kirk in a way that I could relate to. I felt dissapointed leaving the cinema afterwards but I’m sure that he will improve in the sequel. My other major quibble is how quickly that the film wraps itself up. Its almost like the ending itself gets sucked into that Red Matter black hole. Certainly the earth battle finishes too quickly and the vulcan battle finishes too slowly. I thought also that the inclusion of The Beastie boys in the soundtrack was uneccessary but I’ve gotten over it now. The final thing that I seemed to dissaprove of was the Enterprise Corridors which just seemed to have no resemblence at all to any TOS depiction which I felt made no sense. And why was the Bride seemingly on deck 2 or 3? Directly next to a corridor…

On the whole I can find more positives than negatives about Star Trek however I feel that this film sets the standard for the next to surpass.

My rating: 7 out of 10. Good with some excellence but also with room to improve.

252. Billy Bobby - May 9, 2009

228

The no-money thing was a stupid idea dreamed up as a gentle culture clash joke in ST:FC – stupid because the writers should have realised that certain people would take something like that far too seriously.

Actually, Kirk in The Voyage Home couldn’t pay for the pizza because they didn’t use money in the 23rd century. The idealism of Star Trek has been lost in certain areas. What a pity because that is what made the show so special in the first place. I don’t think Martin Luther King would be watching Star Trek today.

253. ZtoA - May 9, 2009

I just saw it on IMAX and will be doing it again soon only next time I’ll sit farther back in the theatre. Normal IMAX movies (i.e. polar ice caps and undersea panorama) are easy to watch on an IMAX screen because the shots are long, the camera movement slow and the edits are barely percievable. The exact opposite is true with feature films and extremely true with shoot’em up action sequences. Trying to pan your eyes from one side of the screen to the other whilst fire and fury are occuring leaves you missing out on the grandure of the effects. So my advice to you is to sit as far back as you can for this one because every frame is worth savoring.

Star Trek was simply Bad Ass. Since there’s no such thing as a perfect movie… perfect being no complaints from critics or commoner alike… we must accept that movies take many artistic licenses without taking one too many. Star Trek didn’t take one too many. It stopped just at the right moments.

Scotty’s mate, the ACNE faced EWOK need not return in the next one. When I first saw him/it I thought director JJ was about to pull a Jar-Jar…NNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOO! But alas, the black eyed pea was only a brief and fleeting character and all was right with the rest of the movie.

The canon stuff some people are harping about is over. The moment they brought the Narada in and destroyed the Kelvin, the new timeline and new canon began. Maybe the next movie or the movie after that will go back and fix it, but I’m not anxious for that.

I’m interested in new adventures based on the now unpredictable strategic and political paradigms the new Trek-verse now has to offer. With the destruction of Vulcan at the hands of a Romulan, usher in a new era of peace and reconcilliation between Romulus and Vulcan Beta? If so, does that mean that the Romulans and not the Klingons are the future former antagonists who join the Federation in the Next Generation.

Go see it! The IMAX version is Hella-Cool, especially the sound system and remember to sit in the back rows. Oh yeah… BUY POPCORN!

254. Billy Bobby - May 9, 2009

230

For that matter, ‘Where No Man Has Gone Before’ was hardly the most intellectual adventure either!

That is because the studio wanted something less cerebral than The Cage. Gene Roddenberry was told to make it exciting or else! That is why there was a huge fight scene with Gary at the end. They even brought in a choreographer from Gone With the Wind to make the scene look better! It is painfully obvious that the idealism of Gene Roddenberry is dead. Roger Ebert said the same thing.

Sadly, movies have to be altered to appease the ADD generation. Goodbye wonderful story telling. Unfortunately, you took just too damn long to tell your wonderful stories.

255. Billy Bobby - May 9, 2009

230

In a universe where Vulcan can get fried and Amanda killed and the cowardly reset switch has been eliminated, none of our characters’ safety is assured. The loss of that safety net can only benefit Star Trek.

This is a great point you made. Sadly, the alternate time line was created by Nero, one of the worst Trek villains.

256. Closettrekker - May 9, 2009

#256—“Sadly, the alternate time line was created by Nero, one of the worst Trek villains.”

I don’t think they set out to make a villain-centric film. In fact, they said as much all along. And that is a good thing. The focus was on reintroducing the heroes, as it should have been.

257. Closettrekker - May 9, 2009

#179—-“The movie never carries the ideas of Gene Roddenberry to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations. ”

When has a good Star Trek movie ever done that?

I disagree about what you believe Roddenberry’s idea of Star Trek to be.

Star Trek’s vision to me was one of an optimistic future in which Humanity not only survives, but unites to conquer the social ills which plague us today, and of course—-to explore the final frontier.

Nothing in this film suggests that this vision is lost. In fact, what is the USS Kelvin doing in the beginning of the film?

258. Gnashpred - May 9, 2009

Just saw it in Nashville at the Regal IMAX..

9.5 out of 10

I loved it – One of the toughest things I had to struggle with was trying to avoid spoilers – so my seeignsome of those may have not given me some of the “wow” factor and impact in some scenes I had been spoiled for.

Kudos to the casting – all ofthem took the roles and made them their own – but still keeping with revernce to the original.

I look forward to seeing it again soon.

I am sorry that for some people the possessiveness for the way they think it should be gets in the way of accepting what has been offerd back to us.

I have missed having star trek to watch – and am glad that I got the opportunity to take my daughter at 10 – like my dad did for me in 79 with TMP.

259. Hobo - May 9, 2009

I loved the original series and all of the former movies and I must say that this one was my favorite. I love the alternate timeline, it allows us to look at the same characters a little differently, like clones of sorts. Giving them the same basic nature with different circumstances shaping them.
I like the fact that the majority of the crew were kind of thrust together right after graduation. It was a little unsettling for a few minutes, but allows for mistakes in judgement that will probably make future movies very interesting. It also allows the characters to be bold and daring … and exciting.
The story was perfectly acceptable. The movie leaves you satisfied with the fulfillment of general expectations and still wanting more.
I give it an overall 9 out of 10. I believe I’ll be watching it every time TNT or Spike (or whichever channel) plays it, even though I’ll have it in my own video library.
I’m already waitng for the next one! Live long and prosper indeed!

260. LoyalStarTrekFan - May 9, 2009

My ratings for the new film:

Premise: 1/10 (Reboot/Alternate Realities)
Plot: 5/10 (Time Travel/Madman out for Revenge)
Special Effects: 10/10
Production Design: 9/10
Costume Design: 9/10
Characters/Acting: 9/10
Music: 8/10 (Based on music composed by Michael Giacchino)
Film: 9 out of 10 (how fun and entertaining it was)

Final Score: 7.5/10.

261. greenjeans - May 9, 2009

RE: #210

“Gene Roddenberry made it perfectly clear that money does not exist in the Federation – there is no need for it.”

From “The Doomsday Machine”:

KIRK: “If we only had some phasers….”

SCOTTY: “Phasers? You’ve got ‘em. I’ve got one bank recharged.”

KIRK: “Scotty, you’ve just earned your pay for the week.”

And then there’s the jokes in “The Apple” about whther or not Kirk should fire/rehire Scotty for not being ale to get the Enterprise out of Vaal’s clutches.

There may not be physical money, per se, but Kirk and company are indeed making some kind of Benjamins. The episodes themselves bear this out.

262. JKP - May 9, 2009

I give it an 8 out of 10.

Here are my thoughts. First, let me preface the POV I’m coming from. I’m not a fan of TNG or anything that came after Star Trek 6. To me, Trek has always been about Kirk, Spock and McCoy (with the Enterprise as the 4th most important character). All the stuff that came after them was nice, but it never felt like Trek to me.

To that end, this film was a success for me. It rekindled the emotional attachment I have for these characters and their relationships. I can overlook some of the minor flaws and whatnot, as I always have with Trek, because at the core, this film captured that tone.

These three characters are different, however, in ways that I’m quite eager to explore in future films. Kirk is more brash and less polished. Spock is more emotional and less in control. McCoy seems less passionate and convicted to his moral compass (hard to imagine the TOS McCoy reacting as passively to Kirk being fired off the ship in a pod). The actors for all three were good, with Urban’s McCoy being the best, in my opinion – too bad he didn’t have some more to do.

As for the supporting characters, with the exception of Scotty, I’ve never felt the others were particularly necessary, and this film really proves that. although the Uhura-Spock thing is an interesting wrinkle. Scotty was the most distant from his TOS era character. A shame that he’s played more for comic relief, as he was in the latter films, than the serious third-in-command that he was in TOS.

I enjoyed Pike a lot. Probably because I’m a big fan of Bruce Greenwood, but he made a great, mature captain. Strong command, good instincts. Pity they bumped him to Admiral.

The villain Nero was ok, but lacked the emotional connection of, say, Khan. He was to serve the plot only and did his job. Blind, raging vengeance is pretty simplistic from a character perspective. Would have been nice to see some more depth from him.

I had no issues with the updated Big E or the set pieces. I’m no fan of time travel, but it had to be done to achieve the reboot – let’s not see it again, though. The costumes were fine. The music could have been better (and I’m generally a fan of Giacchino), but living up to Goldsmith and Horner is tough. Those scores were so well-suited to their films. Giacchino’s, not so much, but perhaps it will grow on me.

I do take umbrage with all the damn “shaky cam” photography that seems prevalent in todays action, but it wasn’t as annoying as some movies. (Although I’d appreciate if next time a tripod or stedicam could be used more!)

I’m most happy that the characters I love are back and weren’t “ruined”. They’re different, but I think it will be a good different as we hopefully get to see them develop over several films.

It’s no Trek 2, but it’s good fun and a nice new beginning. I’m glad my characters are back.

263. xizro345 - May 9, 2009

My personal vote is 6.5 out 10. The movie, for a start, didn’t live to enormous hype. JJ overhyped it too much, and while it was labelled as a “new direction”, they basically played safe all the time.

Bad points first:

– Nero is a totally 2D character. While Khan was a bi-dimensional character, Montalban’s over the top acting made it memorable. Nero just…does faces. And in the end he basically does nothing. His backstory, fleshed only in Countdown, is severely lacking too.

– Quinto isn’t very good for Spock. I never seen his performance on Heroes (not interested), but he plays Spock in a semi-catatonic way, and isn’t exactly believable. Even the Uhura affair seems tacked on.

– The movie is full, full of logic holes. Sometimes events happen just because the screenply says so. An example is the beginning. Despite being told that the Kelvin has “no power for weapons and shields”, it starts firing on the Narada…how? Or the whole scene with Pike and Nero, several elements get introduced just to never be mentioned again.

– The engineering sets look too similar to factories. With a 100+M budget I would have expected better.

– The final point is that, they didn’t do anything really “bold”. Some people say the continuity is changed forever, yet the ending suggests otherwise I’d say. In the end, JJ’s boasting provided to be his own downfall, at least for me.

Good points include:

– Excellent portrayal of Bones by Karl Urban.

– Very good acting from Pine, a believable Kirk.

– Nimoy’s still good after all these years.

– Very good special effects.

– Decent pacing of the story.

I was expecting worse, but still…JJ should have kept a lower profile, and Orci’s absurd explanations for “preserving canon” should have been avoided in the first place.

264. Ted Chila - May 9, 2009

My cousin and I stood in the snow outside a tv store on a cold night in 1966 to see a few minutes of Star Trek in color through the window as we could not do at home.

Well Done.

Thank you.

10.

265. ZtoA - May 9, 2009

For all those people here besmirching the Star Trek script and its’ various time travel tricks. The entire idea of film is the suspension of disbelief. Even the most hard core “canon-ista” had to suspend their disbelief when watching TOS on TV. If these same Trek fundamentalists were to apply the same rigid standards to an episode like “Tomorrow Is Yesterday” as they are now applying to JJ’s movie, I would submit that these same people would have ceased watching the show from that point forward.

Every episode ever made has had a plot hole large enough to drive a truck through it. The real reason we love Trek is the characters, as well as the over-arching optimism the show projected. It’s that love which brings about the suspension of disbelief, almost to a fault.

266. Atrox - May 9, 2009

You cannot please a fan base as ardently zealous as TREK fans! I had a hard time with the Vulcan bit, too. People who say that this is a money grab are being obvious, yah! No one makes a 150 million dollar movie for G. Roddenberry’s philosophy.

The IPOD “generation guy” has to chill. This movie is gonna make it big, breathing air into our beloved franchise. Everyone who is upset about the cannon, come on! Star Trek shamelessly changes and re-images. They hit on something with the Wrath of Khan, and we received uniform continuity. The Enterprise bridge changed over, and over again.

This is a mythology. Mythology is fluid, it changes. Mythology maintains certain aspects, all of which–I think–are here. Yes its a money grab. The only difference this time, is that it was a successful one. Good on you JJ.

Now lets see no more time travel bull****

Oh and come on, the FX were amazing. And this was still a character movie.

Looking forward to the next one.

267. ster julie - May 9, 2009

I’d give it a 9.25–points off for Amanda and Vulcan (=^(

I can’t wait for my book to arrive so I can figure out a few things–everything went by so quickly and there were so many things to see at once. Plus the sound was too loud for me poor ears so I had to wear earplugs to endure the loud sound fx and music, but at the cost of losing some of the dialogue.

I can’t wait for the next installment. The fan fics already cropping up are pretty good. Check them out here: http://www.fanfiction.net/movie/Star_Trek_2009

268. andrew connor - May 9, 2009

Just saw Star Trek in the UK for the first time and LOVED it.. Its totally revitalised the Trek for me, I was glued to the screen (an Odeon in Uxbridge uk which had a TERRIBLE projection problem, black lines down oneside of the screen). despite that the film was fabulous, the cast were stunning and i especially loved the rendition of bones.. sheer quality. the movie is great fun with lots of laugh out loud moments and a action packed plot that positively bounds along without faltering. Suspend your disbelief and GO SEE STAR TREK you will love it !

269. Chris Morgan - May 9, 2009

Man oh man was that GOOD!
10 outta 10
100% fresh
Thanks to all involved!
I loved the old show when I was a kid.
I wore starfleet shirts to school.
I played with my MEGO figures and bridge.
I didn’t really care for any of the other shows, they were ok.
I love this new movie as an adult.
Long live Kirk and Spock and the crew of the one and only Enterprise, well in my timeline anyway.

270. Rick - May 9, 2009

Hello All Star Trek Lovers!!!

BE AWARE OF SPOILERS!!!!!

I just watched the movie today and sadly i didnt enjoy it as much as i thought i would have. I guess the primary reason was that in a way the movie lost its “trekkie-ness” from the passed movies that have been made. To add with Vulcan being gone forever kind of gave the star trek series no meaning any more, you’d might as well just watch this movie since Vulcan has been destoried. I do agree that there was to much action and not to much story line involved, i wished that they had put more of a story line into the movie instead of it just being based on action. However near the ending was good with the destruction of the romulan ship by the enterprise and the vulcan vessle.

OVERALL PLOT = 7

Another thing would be special effects. I do understand that they had to some way increased the special effects to standards but for me personality i think that they pushed the special effects to the point where you couldnt see much of the ship any longer. In the beginning of the movie for example where the kelvin was under attack by the romulan vessle and returning fire, you couldnt really tell what was happening (to many phasers and torpedoes) were being fired. Another thing is that when the enterprise was warping for place to place, there kind of was not stars flying but the ship being surround by something blue liked to show that they were at warp. However i did like the backround music alot, i thought that was amazing!

OVERALL SFX = 7
OVERALL MUSIC = 10

The actors i guess were alright. Kirk, Sulu, checkov and Mccoy was played pretty good. But i didnt really like Urura or spock (Since when did they have a relationship?)

OVERALL ACTORS = 8

OVERALL MOVIE = 6.5-7
I just didnt find it the same as the passed movies, i expectations i assume were just too high.

271. Jim Durdan - May 9, 2009

Thank You J.J., from the botom of a 45 year old trekkers heart, thank you.

Not that we have our space legs, let’s go and explore!

272. Jim Durdan - May 9, 2009

opps I meant Now that we have our space legs.

273. Lt. Atkins - May 9, 2009

I’m 47. I’ve been a trek fan since the 70’s. I just saw this movie with my 14 year old son. He is not as familiar with Trek as he is with Star Wars, but what he has seen of TOS he likes.
He really liked the movie. I’m still formulating my opinion. I guess there were things to like about it and things to not like.
As a fan I can be nit-picky so here it goes.

1. That’s not an engine room, that’s a brewery! And it LOOKS like a brewery!
2. I really thought there was going to be a good explanation for the Enterprise being built in Iowa. I’m still waiting for that one.
3. Spock’s hair is too long in the back. It’s practically a mullet. And what’s with the fake sideburns? A side burn is supposed be from facial hair, not hair growing down from the top of your head and shaped into a point in front of your ear. In every close-up of Quinto and Urban their sideburns are lifted off the side of their face. It looked silly and was distracting. Also, you must cover up the razor stubble on Quinto’s eyebrows. I should not be this distracted by the make-up department.
4. Uniforms were a nice effort but the outer tunic should fit better. Too many folds and wrinkles. Uhura should have sleeves. What? She can’t be sexy with sleeves? I want sleeves! It makes the legs stand out better. Besides, how else will you know what rank she is?
5. Orion women are strange and mysterious and dangerous. Their erotic nature is supposedly so intense they can drive a man insane with lust. But now they have been reduced to college bimbos. Thanks for that. I’m sure they appreciate it too.
6. I’m okay with Vulcan being destroyed. I agree completely with JJ’s reasoning behind it. He did not want to simply re-film The Cage and Where No Man Has Gone Before where everyone would know how it all ends. This way we can go back to the youthful beginning and tell new stories. Although it felt a little awkward with Spock prime now living with this new version of the Trek universe.
7. Tricorders were a tad too small. Phasers were not phasers but simply shiny Star Wars blasters. I want beams! Not glowing bullets!
8. Tone down the humor. Trek was never that funny. When McCoy shouts “Are you out of your Vulcan Mind?” in the TOS it was not for laughs. He said it because he was very angry and it was a dramatic moment. It’s what made us like him so much. He was not afraid to confront people on their BS. He cared and we cared along with him.
9. Chekov was my favorite character. I know someone from Russia and his accent is even worse. Yelkin’s performance so much reminded me of Chekov that it was during his scenes that I felt the most nostalgia. Thanks Anton.
10. The thing I miss the most about TOS is all the planet adventures the crew would have. When was the last time a federation Star Ship visited a strange new world and encountered a new civilization? In TOS the show was about saving the ship or saving Kirk or saving Spock. Not saving the whole dam universe every week. Let’s try to bring the plots down to Earth a little bit.
11. I like the Enterprise. It makes for a nice transition to the movie Enterprise. However my heart will always belong to Matt Jefferies. Now THERE is something you should pay homage to. Go back and look at Matt’s original artwork and then build THAT with a 100 million dollar budget and you’ll get what we’re talking about. That being said I can honestly say that the special effects shots of the Enterprise are my favorite scenes in the movie. They are spectacular.
12. The music was nice but largely forgettable. There were so many wonderful little themes from the original series that should be utilized. Not the opening credits which I admit is a bit dated and was not scored for a symphony Orchestra but more for a jazz orchestra. I’m talking the great fanfares when the ship would appear on screen or Spock’s love theme. You know that deep cello piece. Imagine hearing that while Uhura is trying to comfort Spock after the death of his mother. Bringing back some of that stuff would make an emotional connection with the audience so intense there wouldn’t be a dry eye in the house.

Well there you have it. my twelve biggest nit-picks.
I hope somebody reads this.

274. DeBeckster - May 9, 2009

I walked out of the movie theater with a buzz, and it wasn’t because of anything I had to drink before the movie! When the final credits began to roll, I actually felt a buzz. What a rush! About an hour after the rush wore off, here are some of my thoughts:

THE GOOD–THE HIGHLIGHTS:

Karl Urban–scary good! Not only did he have McCoy down to a science, but it was almost llike he was channeling D. Kelly. He had some great lines and he delivered them perfectly!

Zach Quinto–I had a feeling that he’d pull off a good Spock, but he was much better than expected.

Chris Pine–He embodied the spirit of Kirk without the hamminess of Shatner. I love Shat, but I’m glad he was able to pull out KIrk’s bravado and put his own stamp on the character.

Zoe Saldana–besides being a fox, she was able to put a little umph into Uhura, which was sorely lacking in the original series.

Leonard Nimoy–it was like seeing and old friend again.

Ben Cross–If it couldn’t be Mark Leonard, he is the next best thing.

Antony Yelchin–good acting, a little hard to understand the accent sometimes.

The action was great–I was alternatley scared one minute, lauging the next. Abrams did a great job of moving the action forward, and the special effects were fantastic. The shot at the end of the movie of the Enterprise moving away from the black hole I think was the coolest shot of the ship flying in the whole movie.

The music also was fantastic–it was almost like watching Star Trek II again the way the music complimented the action.

THE NOT SO GOOD, BUT NOT THAT BAD

I don’t want to be seen as one of those Trek fans where if one minute detail was left out, it’s a violation of cannon. But as I thought about the movie, these were some of the things that I wish had been different:

Note to Abrams–a little steadier on the camera please? And enough with the lens flares–I’d like to see the actors, not bright lights.

Spock and Uhura–WTF?

Did they really have to kill Amanda?

And as far as the whole “Ahhhhhh! It’s not cannon!” feeling, it reminded me of my son recently when he had to get his immunization boosters for when he starts kindergarten next fall. He screamed bloody murder because the needles hurt. (He got three in one day, poor little guy.) Do I enjoy subjecting my son to pain? No. But he needed the temporary pain of an injection to ensure that he doesn’t come down with measles, mumps etc. This is how I regard the altered time line theme of the movie. As much as I love Trek, something had to change or it was going to get sick and not get better. Radical things had to be done to make the franchise relevant to people that are younger than me. (I’m in my mid 30’s, just to let you know.) There was a part of me that waited for the part of the movie when Old Spock would go back in time and fix things so all of the original history would happen “the right way.” As the movie was ending, when I realized that it wasn’t going to happen, I felt a little sad, as if the last 40 years didn’t count. But then I realized that Abrams had to do it this way so that he can create more Trek adventures on his terms, which will give us good stuff to watch in the years to come. I will be seeing it again to try to catch the stuff I missed the first time. And I’m planning to take my Mom, who introduced me to Trek when I was little. If I were to rate this movie, I’d give it a 9 out of 10. Tell you’re friends–it’s a great movie!

275. Holo J - May 9, 2009

I’ve been back from the cinema a couple of hours now and thought I would share my thoughts. As a long time Star Trek fan, I was always against changes to the 40 History of the future (Canon) but I had got my head around the fact it was happening a long time ago. I’d accepted it and understood why they were doing it.

(Spoilers)

I went into the cinema with an open mind expecting changes but didn’t quite expect one of the best loved planets in Star Trek History to bite the dusk. I hate how they has just wiped out the original reality/universe and making it so there isn’t any chance at all being anything like what came before from the Prime reality/universe.

Spock and Uhura in a relationship seemed a bit random to me and seemed to come from nothing, obviously something happened off screen at the academy. What we saw on the screen seemed to develop very quickly.

Vulcan is no more and that sucks! I know people love that they have just thrown out all that has gone before with this time travel story but its that part of the story that has broken this long time fans heart. Every time I think of the movie I just think about that moment. I know we have been told the original universe still exists but it really doesn’t feel like that to me.

The things I really enjoyed were the things they had obviously put in for the fans. Like “Bones” back story, Spock’s “Yesteryear” back story and Kirks famous cheating on a certain test. I also thought the actors who were cast did a pretty good Job portraying the characters. Karl Urban performance as “Bones” was the stand out for me.

The greatest thrill for me about this movie and probably what saved it from being too far removed from what has come before was seeing Leonard Nimoy as Spock again. His short time on the screen really grabbed my attention. It’s just sad that he appears to have come from an equally grim future where another established planet is destroyed. So in either reality something big has changed.

The special effects were also very good although I would have preferred a more balanced amount of complete shots of the entire Enterprise and the other ships compared to all the close ups shots we got. But that’s just a small nit pick I guess.

Overall I think I have come a way a little disappointed. I think it felt more Star Wars than Star Trek. The film has its moments, it’s certainly not a bad movie, its just not “Your dads” Star Trek. Being a dad myself, I will miss it as it was. I know most are cool with that and I am sure this movie is just the start of this new timelines adventures. My heart just sinks at the thought we can never have any adventures in Trek original timeline again which we are assured still exist but only on DVD and repeats for now and evermore. :(

As a Sci Fi movie I would give the film 7/10. But when I think about the big changes to my “comfort food” Star Trek I’ve known and loved for most of my life I would have to give it 5/10. At this moment in time even for a new reality it seems to have gone a bit to far for my taste.

I am sure I will be told I am in the minority and I am a dinosaur for saying this. Maybe when I watch it again and the dust has settled I’ll feel differently but right now I just feel something has been lost.

276. Holo J - May 9, 2009

Also…

(Spoiler)

Planet Vulcan was destroyed by a black hole perhaps it reassembled the other side.. wherever of whenever that could be is another matter…Wishful thinking maybe… anyone?? Well I have to hope I am still in shock…

Then they could call the sequel Star Trek 2 (rebooted) ”The search for Vulcan” ;)

277. Stuart Irwin - May 9, 2009

I just saw the movie last night and I want my 2 hrs back! The whole point of the Star Trek franchise is that the plots have some scientific facts behind them, not so with this drivel. The writers obviously have never even done primary school science! The worst part about it is if they had just asked some physicists to help with the plot and the design of the visual effects it would have been a much better and awe inspiring movie. As it was the planet dissapearing into a black hole was reminiscent of a clod of dirt going down a bath plug hole. In reality such an event would look completely different and about a million times as spectacular. And as for the destruction of the planet by the supernova. It looked like a sand castle blowing away in the wind. Pathetic! And the whole idea of a black hole swallowing up a supernova, ridiculous. In fact most if not all supernovas create black holes anyway. Just goes to show what happens when you let unimaginative morons loose on what was a good franchise. Bitterly dissapointed.

278. Gibnerd - May 9, 2009

“I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minds. I’d love someone to say, ‘Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry’s was nothing!’” – Gene Roddenberry, Starburst magazine

“…I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow’s things to tomorrow’s generations…” – Gene Roddenberry

“Commanding a starship is your first, best, destiny. Anything else is a waste of material.” -Spock, to Kirk

In many of the reviews & comments for the new Star Trek film things similar to “It is okay to like Star Trek again” or “This ain’t your father’s Star Trek” are said. And even though I had a falling out over the mid nineties with it, Trek (along with Star Wars & Indy) have always been my all time favorites. See, I’ve loved Trek even when I knew damn well it was lousy. I RELIGIOUSLY watched Voyager & swore by DS9 every week. I watched Enterprise every single week during its 4 short years. I saw Nemesis 4 times in the theater and even twice in one day. I’ve flown to Vegas to go to the giant Vegas Convention and talked to a guy in a Borg costume for an hour about Sybok. I am a Trekkie & a Trekker. I am a fan who on a cruise read an Enterpise book called “Surak’s Soul” while sitting on a beach in the Caribbean. Why does my Star Trek, my love, need an updating? An improvement? I saw the new film twice last night and I loved it. But did it improve Star Trek? Not really. Let me explain.

A couple years ago I got the DVD box sets for all 3 seasons of The Original Series. Upon watching them, I came to the personal conclusion that not only was the Original Series the best Trek ever made that all other series were reaching & sometimes struggling to achieve what TOS did with ease. The Original Series told thoughtful science fiction stories and did it with well written, well rounded human characters. Spock, possibly the most interesting of them all was half human and through this said more of what is was to be human then almost any other character. This was later expanded upon to death with Data in Next Generation but everyone knew that Data (like Odo, The Doctor, Tuvok, Seven of Nine & T’Pol after him) was just playing “the Spock role”. The character relationships in all the following series, to me, all seemed to just try to get close to what was achieved in TOS and specifically the friendship of Krk & Spock. A friendship so simple but yet it defines everything that Trek is about. Very different types coming together to not only explore strange new worlds, but be best friends.

While watching JJ Abrams’ new Trek film the one thing that struck me the most was how much this wasn’t a new vision for Trek as it was an honest recycle of everything that is the best about Trek. The best about Trek that has been done before and what always should have been done. The effects are without a doubt the best EVER seen in anything called Star Trek. Yes it is faster paced, shot more “modern” and has things that are obviously in there so that the kids don’t get bored, but guess what? So did the Original Series. Chekov came in with his wig cuz The Monkees were real popular and NBC wanted some of that action. Is the new film perfect? No. Some of the music choices in the fist half hour of the film are a bit wonky, the lens flare is almost over done, Nero is never the balls out villian you want him to be, the Spock/Uhura thing is a bit weird and not all the comedy works. But does any of that ruin the film? No way, not even close.

Much like the best of The Original Series (Arena, Amok Time, Balance of Terror, Tribbles, The Corbomite Maneuver, City on the Edge) the new film is fun, fast paced, a little corny and full of heart. This is a film that embraces Star Trek as a whole and yes, sends it off in a very exciting direction for hopefully many more voyages to come. The writers, Alex Kurtzman and Bob Orci had me very nervous after I saw Transformers, but I must say that, with a little rumored help from LOST co-show runner Damon Lindlelof, they NAILED it. And how did they nail it? Not even close with a whacked out sci-fi madness story which isn’t really here but I hope to see in a sequel. They nailed with the characters. Kirk IS Kirk. Spock IS Spock. Bones, played masterfully by Karl Urban is PERFECT. Myself and a friend of mine agree that the whole Uhura/Spock love story is a little weird and we don’t really see the point of it right now, but even Uhura is Uhura. Even Chekov & Sulu get their moments of glory here. Seriously when ever, ever did an audience applaude Chekov in one of the TOS films? They nailed it by sticking just to what Gene Roddenberry created and just giving it a shiny new coat to wear.

One of the most interesting parts of the new film for me was Leonard Nimoy’s performance as Spock. This is the same Spock we’ve seen through all the original episodes, the one who died in 2, saved the whales & helped shoot a photon torpedo at God. That Spock, especailly after part 4, was a looser, “dumble dumb ass on you” Spock. This is that Spock a generation older. Nimoy plays him like a wizened old Hippy Vulcan and I loved it. This is a Spock who while still hanging on to his Vulcan half will smirk, get teary eyed nd tell his younger self to chill out. That connection & possible conclusion to the ORIGINAL Trek timeline/universe/canon gave me goosebumbs. The fact that Nimoy’s Spock story was told with such love, care and devotion to what has come before also made me really more then just enjoy this film.

For months before this film’s release, I told people that even if I thought it totally sucked, I would want it do well. That is because my love for Trek is bigger then just this film. I am now happy to know that my love for Trek includes this new film. I was blown away by how much it just was Trek. and that it had found itself again. The Human Adventure has truly just begun……

279. Gibnerd - May 9, 2009

btw, i give it a 9

280. Yammer - May 9, 2009

278, Gibnerd

Great observations.

Yup, it is both reverent and too loose, sympathetic to the original yet told in radically different style.

But it IS Star Trek — not every aspect of course (how could it be?) but utterly satisfying in what it does manage to convey.

281. Nix - May 10, 2009

WTF! I put this in the same category of Bobby Ewing waking up and the whole season was dream.

A convenient device to rewrite whatever you what without putting any effort into actual writing.

How do you feel about everything Star Trek that YOU know now just being an alternate reality?

Then again, maybe Kirk will wake up and it will all just be a dream in Star Trek 12. Or wait, is it Spock that will wake up? Or Spock Prime????

282. Nix - May 10, 2009

I stand corrected….

It was Pam Ewing that woke up.

And I meant to write “whatever you WANT, not (what)”…..

(Too bad I can’t go back in time and fix my typos. Like some people CAN.)

283. Tekie - May 10, 2009

Betrayed.

Enjoyed the movie while watching it- especially the clever bits of how the characters first met- but woke up the morning after feeling betrayed. Wow. They just revamped the entire ST timeline, anything’s game from the early timeline forward. What a great franchise opp. Gee, thanks JJAbrams for figuring out a way to make $ off the new version. Wonder how Gene would feel.

284. Simon - May 10, 2009

As far as the money thing – everyone seems to forget the “credits” system in “Trouble With Tribbles”.

285. Devon - May 10, 2009

Well here I am with my review.

Tonight I had the second opportunity to see this film at the Imax theater in Noblesville, Indiana. It was a 9:30 show, I would say was easily 95% sold out. The line was MASSIVE. Literally. The diversity was all over the place. Old & Young and everything in between. Black and white and everything in between. Trekkie and Non-Trekkie and everything in between. A few costumed people. Seriously, some of them are cringe worthy as they were simply colored shorts with fabric insignias, however, it doesn’t take from the heart of the devotion. So that was cool.

To the movie itself. I was prepared for the worst, hoped for the best. Luckily, I got the latter. In a way, as Robert Altman put it, this is “Star Trek’s Greatest Hits” infused with brand new work, which for a reboot is just fine. It is funny, it is thrilling, it is breathtaking, it is riveting, it is emotional at times (there is a tear jerker several minutes into the film,) and to me, this film does have heart. If I had any fear, is that we would get Transformers type dialog and maturity. Funnily enough, we did get some technobabble so the film isn’t “dumbed down” as some think it would be. Now, I won’t say that the film rests with the “most brilliant” of the franchise, but it is my opinion that this film is superior to quite a bit of Trek from the past 20 years or so, and even some original series episodes. The story is pretty cool.

The SFX were top-notch, no questions asked. The music was very good as well. Not Horner level, but still very good on its own.

Some thing that were memorable for me?

Again, the entire first scene before the title card is a tear jerker and I thought was well done.

The character moments between Spock and his parents, and the whole thing Spock had to go through on Vulcan from the bullies. An absolute homage to The Animated Series and good to see this “Canonised.” I also enjoyed the “Cup Classrooms,” which of course were homages to Spock’s training session on Vulcan at the beginning of “The Voyage Home.”

I like Scotty, someone who I thought I wouldn’t like. He is a bit more cheerful rather than a goofball I thought, though there is only one “slapstick” scene with him falling out of the water tank. The scene with him beaming Spock and Kirk to the Narada was great.

The Kobyashi Maru Test. There were three levels to this that I thought were very good.
1.) Kirk’s whole approach to the now modified test was priceless.
2.) Secondly, the Klingon Vessels were top-notch. They were spot on with the movie-version of the Klingon Battle Cruisers and I was impressed with that.
3.) The twist at the end where we find out that it was Spock’s test.

Leonard Nimoy was very good. For some reason, I feel that they got him more right for his character than even the last few Star Trek movies. He wasn’t really wooden or stale and devoid of some of his human traits in his personality. He was still Spock, but a little more upbeat in his delivery. He was confident with his emotions If I had to say one thing though, perhaps there could have been a better way to handle how Kirk and Spock Prime met. Perhaps have him detecting Kirk on Delta Vega from the Jellyfish

Humor. They got the humor right too. Not too silly, but not flat either. To me, humor was what could make Star Trek enjoyable, and this certainly was a key ingredient here. It wasn’t “gloomy” and everyone was stiff. People were serious when they needed to be, but they were witty as well. It was.. “fun.”

Overall, the characters were pretty well nailed IMHO. They weren’t mimicing the original actors, but they took the hearts of the characters and made them their own, and made it work. This is how I think they “nailed them.”

Bruce Greenwood was meant to be a Starfleet captain, plain and simple.
Chris Pine is absolutely a star and I think they made the best choice here
Zachary Quinto was very good too, better than I thought he would be.
Zoe Saldana was one of the main attractions, surprisingly. She was very likable and very good. I do hope she is given more to do in the next film, however.
John Cho, surprisingly, the one given the least to do, when ironically being one of the most recognizable stars of the cast.
Anton Yelchin – I was also glad to see that they gave Chekov some substance, though, he is sort of the Wesley Crusher of the group (but not in the bad way.) Strangely enough, I bought his accent. He’s still young, perhaps being around more people with North American accents will have an influence on him in future installments and make him a little more intelligable. Yelchin was superb regardless.
Erin Bana – He is good, but his character seemed more or less “Just there to be the bad guy.” There is more substance to him in the original cuts I’m sure. I am not sure how about taking out his Ruha Pentha scenes. Would be nice to see some Klingons!
Leonard Nimoy is Leonard Nimoy!
Ben Cross – Probably the weakest of the group. I’m sure he’s good as an actor, but not sure if he was right for Sarek. He’s not horrible, but thought there could have been someone better out there. Maybe, maybe not.
Winona Ryder and Tyler Perry were cool. Not distracting and Perry seemed to be good, even if he is for a couple of scenes.

Some things that I would have liked to have seen or would have improved on….
Why didn’t George beam onto a shuttle, or at least try, after putting the Kelvin in auto pilot? Perhaps a scene where he runs to the transporter room and doesn’t make it in time?

I would have liked to have seen more with Kirk regarding his father specifically. Here both Kirk and Spock have lost a parent because of Nero, and I think this would have been a good opportunity for a bonding scene between the two to bring them together even more. Why not? Maybe it would allow the real pain of Kirk being with out his father.

Also, Kirk officially becomes a Captain and his mother isn’t at the ceremony? I would have included her. This could have been a perfect character moment (Which Orci/Kurtzman most certainly proved that they could pull off by the way.) He is becoming the man his father was, this would have been cool.

I wasn’t sure about the fight scene between Kirk and Spock. Spock lets loose on him and no one stops him? That was probably the one “big thing” I wasn’t sure about, but didn’t hinder my enjoyment. Just like a Watercooler thing.

In conclusion, I found this to be a very credible entry into the Star Trek lore, and I think it is only going to get better. It has the makings of a good Star Trek story. Is it perfect? No. Are there some things that could have been revised a little? Sure! But I would say that about a lot of Star Trek, so I’m not complaining! If anyone tries to tell you that “This isn’t Star Trek,” they don’t have a clue! There is absolutely nothing here that makes this anymore or anyless a Star Trek than before. The only thing different is that this has two things that Star Trek has lacked in a long time… a pulse & cajones! It even has some brains and heart to boot, IMHO. If you haven’t seen this, please do. Go in with an open mind and just have fun! Just don’t go in with unreal expectations and realities of what Star Trek supposedly was before and try to hold this up to it. You will likely find that not even the best of Star Trek will hold up to the unrealistic levels some fans have put it.

8.75/10

286. Alexofborg - May 10, 2009

Suggestions and letter to Mr Orci and Mr. Kurtzman,

7 out of 10

I wanted to take my time and digest the film before writing a more in-depth review, but I wanted to put down some thoughts, specially as the writers said they would be checking these comments out as they get ready to write the next movie. Don’t rest on your laurels guys, the great Star Trek movie is still waiting to be made.

1) The first hour or so is perfect, just incredible filmmaking and completely engrossing. Realize that a big part of this is due to watching these iconic characters meet for the first time, and seeing Kirk and Spock grow up. After the movie gets to the actual plot and threat of the movie, the film really stumbles and makes it to the end on the fumes of the good will from the first half of the film. YOU WILL NOT HAVE THIS LUXURY ON THE NEXT FILM. Your story is going to need to carry the sequel.

2) Avoid the “TV episode on a big scale” mentality of the TNG films. At the end, the film felt more like a TV pilot than the first in a series of FILMS. You don’t need to tidy everything up at the end. Kirk didn’t need to become the official Captain of the Enterprise in this movie. That could’ve been handled in the next film. One of the great strengths of the Original Crew Star Trek films in general, and Treks II-IV in particular, is how different they felt than the TV show, and not just visually. They weren’t just missions, these were personal stories that dealt with change and growth: Kirk retiring, Spock dying, the Enterprise destroyed, the crew as renegades from Starfleet using a Klingon Bird-of-Prey… they were serialized, grand yet personal, and as different from “mission of the week” of TV mentality as you could get. The fact that you felt the need to tidy it up so much at the end as to have Kirk be promoted directly from cadet to Captain made it feel like an episode at the end. It raised concern about future movies just starting with the Enterprise in space, being called on a mission, and then warping off at the end. TNG already did this in all their films, and even the best (First Contact) felt like an expensive episode instead of a film, something that the Original Crew films never felt like, except for yours.

3) Technobabble, and Convoluted Plot. Again, this has been the crutch of Spin-off Star Trek (not the original), as fans of TNG, your story exhibited it in spades. TOS used technology only in the most simple of terms: Sensors, Transporters, Communicators. Compare the plot of Nemesis or even First Contact with the one for Wrath of Khan or Voyage Home. Straight vs Convoluted. Yours was convoluted. And your solution was a technobabble solution, with the red-whatever substance and the black hole and the ejecting cores — all TNG stuff. This is same-old, same-old Star Trek spin-off crap that has ran this franchise into the ground in the past, AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ORIGINAL SERIES.

4) Weak villains. Nero joins the long list of boring black-hat villains in Star Trek films (Kruge, Klaa, Soran, Ru’afo, Shinzon), and the even more pathetic, short list of boring black hat villains that make no sense and/or have cryptic motivations (Shinzon). These people are miners? How did they immediately get this amazing weaponry that destroys several starships and Klingon vessels? How intimately involved could they be with the project by Spock to save their world then? Not at all! So how can they can so singlemindedly blame him later, to the point where they all want to destroy several entire worlds to have vengeance upon him? They attack him immediately? An immediately after are sucked to the past and commit to pursue this genocide? Wouldn’t their first thought be: “Hey! We’re in the past! How about we go to Romulus and tell everyone about this star that will go supernova in 90 years so that the catastrophe is avoided?” It’s just convoluted, improbable, and takes the audience out of the film. Now, the thing is, TOS never, ever, had a black hat villain. Not once, not even Khan. In that sense, Star Trek The Motion Picture and The Voyage Home are the closest in spirit to the series. They have no villain. Maybe that could be a greater challenge for a sequel. Either that, or spend time creating and showing the audience a formidable villain, and keep him/her around for several films, like X-Men. But enough with the disposable, forgettable villains.

5) Daring (or lack thereof). Star Trek 2009 is fun and exciting, but feels made by committee with a look at demographics. And I don’t blame them, with the amount of money being spent. And there lies the problem. It seems unlikely that further projects will take any chances. They won’t dare make something completely different like, say, what The Voyage Home was at the time. With the larger budget comes a larger scope, but also greater aversion to risk. I fear for a future of films like the second half of this one, just carbon copies of mindless, souless popcorn fare.

6) Sense of gravitas and heart (or lack thereof). The movie felt fluffy and inconsequential. The best Star Trek movies -hell the best genre films – have a sense of momentum, of weight and heart, of a story building. Think of Wrath of Khan, Aliens, Terminator 2. Do you see the difference? In the Original Crew films, think of how the destruction of the Enterprise was handled in Star Trek III. The flight of the Bird of Prey into Vulcan. The entire ending of Star Trek II, from the moment that Khan activates the Genesis device. Now think of how the destruction of Vulcan was handled. It just kinda happened, the film didn’t make you feel much for it. The story of how Kirk comes into his own, from drifting drop-out to Captain, didn’t have any sense of drama or heart, of a man finding his best destiny, like the third trailer made us believe.

You made a movie that could’ve been, not only the best Star Trek movie ever, but one of the best films of the year, a homerun. You ended up with a solid double. But you get another chance at bat, how great is that?

Alex

287. Chris Pike - May 10, 2009

I read and heard a few comments to the effect of the film being rediculously satisfying, enjoyable, entertaining etc. I didn’t know what that could mean until my first viewing – and that description is a perfect summation. I didn’t care about the dislike I first felt at the first image released of the E or bridge. That vanished into insignificance (and could even understand the redesign decisions) with the huge heart the film had, the rush of illogical emotion, adrenaline, enjoyment, poignancy and visual spectacle experienced.

The casting and acting were much better than I expected, not the slightest trace of a flat spot with any of the cast. ZQ and CP just absolutely got it, bang on and every performance was so enjoyable.

JJ’s best to date and I know he’s got more to come.

The score was great but the break into AC original theme at the end was extraordinary and easily the best part, bought a tear to the eye. Certainly the best interpretation of the orignal great score I have heard.

The comedy worked far better than I expected, and the allergic reaction of Kirk scene was hilarious, I really didn’t expect to find that as funny as I did.

The engine room and use of contemporary elements was the only downside, and didn’t work for me at all. Hopefully that is something to be recftified for the next dozen or so installments!

I can’t remember having such an enjoyable cinema experience for many many years. There’s hope yet for the Hollywood blockbuster machine with this, Batman, Cloverfield and Iron Man.

288. Drael - May 10, 2009

Overall, Im dissapointed. Id have been satisfied if it were a simple action film, but I love startrek, all of the TV series. The dim hope is that someone can pick it up and make something either more true to the original/s, or something truely different. (Like say what battestar galactica did in its re-imagining). You can change it fine, but for what purpose, what does it really add?

I did like the new effects (warp, transporter beam). lol. And scotty was funny.

289. VulcanNonibird - May 10, 2009

On Vulcan & Amanda: True, it’s hard too loose both. First, I really like Vulcan – have all trek novels covering Vulcan and still think it’s the most fascinating planet in trek. Second, now as Amanda is played so wonderfully by Winona I miss her even more.

But every trek movie came with a BIG event or threat:

One: Nearly Destruction of Earth
Two: Death of Spock
Three: Spock is Back, Enterprise crashed
Four: Nearly Destruction of Earth
Five: God is Here – quite lame….
Six: Praxis Explodes, Chancellor killed, Fed President nearly killed
Seven: Enterprise Crashed, Kirk dead
Eight: Nearly assimilation of Earth
Nine: Oh, here nothing – but this was IMHO just a blown-up TV-movie
Ten: Enterpise crashed

So we had 3x Enterpise crashed and 3x Earth nearly destroyed – so it must be something new.

And even if I do like the classic Trek over all other series it still has the boundaries of the 60s – many things you can’t do due to censors and of course you don’t have the money to replace major characters and/or ships every episode. Okay, they can’t blow up a planet every movie….

But I look forward to look more with this nice new trek cast – hopefully they get good scripts. But that burden is now on JJ….

290. Weerd1 - May 10, 2009

I know why the Kelvin has 800 people on it! They were taking an Earth colony to Tarsus IV! The Kelvin was a science vessel operating at the edge of Federation space. The family of the crew were going to go to a colony closer to the Kelvin’s AO in order to facilitate shore leave with loved ones, and not having to zap all the way back to Earth!

I also have a suggestion for the sequel, and it seems so obvious- not Khan, KOR! Establish a recurring Classic style Klingon foil for Kirk in a new version of the 2260s with no Organian Peace Treaty. I’m willing to bet there will be no peace so long as THIS Kirk lives either.

291. Mike - May 10, 2009

#261

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Money

292. Weerd1 - May 10, 2009

291- is it possible the family who had brewed Bud for the last five hundred years still brews it out of family tradition and enlightenment and not out of pursuit of profit?

Is it possible that by the 2200s Nokia is no longer a brand name but identified with specific devices like how we now call all moving staircases “escalators” and all flying disk toys “frisbee” despite the fact those started as brand names?

293. Billy Bobby - May 10, 2009

286

1) The first hour or so is perfect, just incredible filmmaking and completely engrossing….. After the movie gets to the actual plot and threat of the movie, the film really stumbles and makes it to the end on the fumes of the good will from the first half of the film. YOU WILL NOT HAVE THIS LUXURY ON THE NEXT FILM. Your story is going to need to carry the sequel.

This is by far the best review I’ve seen. Alexofborg nailed it. The beginning was so perfect. Sadly, Abrams did almost everything wrong the second hour. For me, things went down hill when Spock kicked Kirk off the ship. Kirk’s meeting with Old Spock was the jumping the shark moment. It was so awkward in the theater during that scene. I literally watched the whole movie fall apart in that scene. Unfortunately, it never recovered.

294. Bill B - May 10, 2009

Rating: 5 out of 10.

My biggest gripe I can’t seem to shake is that Gene Roddenberry’s vision of the future is not here. Cadets beating up townies? Really? Someone saying “Godspeed” to the cadets as they are leaving? Hardly in fashion with Roddenberry’s vision of a future of secular humanism. Knock down drag out fights on the bridge? Huh? I understand that conflict is the cornerstone of good drama, but I think the main characters still could have “butted heads” in a more civilized manner and in a way that could still be entertaining. Oh, and product placement in a “Trek” movie done so overtly? Roddenberry’s vision of a bright future of Earth and humanity is not here. Nor does the film speak to the human condition, which most Trek films seemed to do.

Also, reducing Scotty to basically a turd in the scene in the bowels of the ship seemed a bit ridiculous and insulting, and really added nothing to the film. It was just plain unnecessary.

I can also make the argument that the film’s score is easily the weakest of the movie series. Just seemed like a generic super-hero score, although with all the loud sound effects, maybe I just couldn’t hear it properly.

I thought the story was a bit convoluted, and Nero the villain wasn’t explored enough. I didn’t quite buy his motivations or actions much; despite that Erica Bana made him a cut above Shinzon. Just wish the film would have spent a little more time with Nero. Could have been a classic antagonist.

On the plus side, the visual effects were excellent, as were the set and costume design. (I especially liked Admiral Pikes ST:TMP uniform, a nice nod to the first film.) Actually, a lot of nice references peppered throughout the film from some of the previous Treks. I thought the acting was solid; Chris Pine made an engaging Kirk and the rest of the cast was just fine. I could not think of a better actor for Spock’s father, either.

I guess to sum up my little review, I just didn’t see this as Roddenberry’s Star Trek. This is someone else’s vision, which begs the question should this really be considered Star Trek? This film was a decent action adventure movie, but just not Star Trek in my eyes.

Thanks for letting me rant a bit and look forward to some opposing viewpoints.

295. Bill B - May 10, 2009

#209

I could not agree with you more.(Well, except for Ben Cross!) I am post 294 and read your review after my posting. You put my feelings into words better than I did. This just isn’t Star Trek.

296. Captain Yor - May 10, 2009

Saw it at an IMAX theater yesterday. Decent and worth seeing on the big screen but not great. The casting was good, especially the big three (Kirk, Spock, and McCoy) and Pike. The only real letdowns, character-wise were Uhura and Chekov. They made a mockery of Uhura with her not reporting those transmissions right away and even worse her constantly running after Spock with batty eyes (totally unnecessary romance). Chekov was just unnecessary period. A 17-year-old with an exaggerated accent at the helm of the flagship of the federation? They should have waited until the sequel to bring him in. Nero was ok but it’s a joke that some people are comparing him to Khan. In Eric Bana’s defense he didn’t get much screen time nor did they establish his motivations (or whereabouts for 25 years) very well. Turns out the “Countdown” prequel comic is pretty important in this regard but it shouldn’t be because alot of people probably haven’t read it before seeing the movie.

Storywise was good and bad. There were some great moments and scenes between the characters. Unfortunately these moments and scenes were strung together with questionable motivations and unbelievable coincidences. Kirk going from cadet to captain of the federation’s flagship? Kirk landing on Delta Vega within walking distance of a cave where Spock Prime just happens to be and a federation outpost where Scotty just happens to be? Nero’s rampage against Earth, the Kelvin, and the numerous Starfleet ships he destroyed in the Prequel comic all AFTER Starfleet (lead by Data commanding the Enterprise-E) saved his butt then even sent medical vessels (that Nero destroyed) to help Romulus evacuate. So unlike Vulcan, his thirst for revenge didn’t really make any sense against Earth and its forces.

The other problem I had was the frenetic pace, particularly the action-orientated scenes. Why are so many directors these days obsessed with jerky cameras and fast cuts? This method really makes such sequences a confusing mess and less effective to me.

I did like the numerous nods to the original (like Kirk biting the Apple during the Kobayshi Maru text and the Tribble in Scotty’s workshop) and Leonard Nimoy was great as always. Plus, the Special FX were very good and some of the much too abundant humor was really funny.

Although I sound really negative I didn’t dislike the film. I just had higher expectations I guess. With all the introductions out of the way and the crew in place it does at least set up for a sequel with potential.

Most importantly, at least for me, this kind of action-packed, testosterone-driven Star Trek for the masses should make alot of money which could perhaps lead to its return to television where Star Trek truly belongs IMHO.

I happened to see the Original Series episode “The Doomsday Machine” last night and the TNG two-parter (with Leonard Nimoy) “Unification 1 & 2″ recently. Both were better than this film which reaffirmed to me even more that Star Trek needs to return to TV. Here’s hoping. :D

Film rating: 7.5/10

297. Dan - May 10, 2009

I am a big TOS fan and I came away with mixed feelings. It’s always fun to see Trek come to life. But there were big flaws. 6.5/10

I loved McCoy; Karl Urban was so great. Stunning, really. Just wanted to see more of him. The strongest, most faithful performance by far. Most of the other crew were quite good for me, too, particularly Scotty, and I really enjoyed them, although I think it’s silly they didn’t cast a Japanese-American as Sulu.

Big disappointments were Kirk and Spock. They re-imagined these characters’ personalities, and I couldn’t forgive that. Spock is, I guess, more human now than in the TV show. He has no problem passionately making out with women, in public even, and he has a temper with a short fuse. Gone is the pathos and reserve that made this character so iconic. And I didn’t like the actor chosen for him. Kirk is now a James Dean rebel, instead of the TV character, who was daring in the service of principle, not thrill-seeking or ego. The actor chosen seems unintelligent. And giving the Romulans a chance to surrender, then rubbing his hands with glee that they refuse and he can now kill them and exact revenge? Very disappointing.

Another big disappointment was seeing the Trek universe’s history and future lazily deleted, and cheaply explained away with the alternate timeline device. Surely there was no need for that. I look forward to a future movie in which we learn that this entire movie was a dream sequence. There would be some poetic justice in seeing this movie deleted itself by another equally cheap and lazy plot device.

Some other thoughts: thumbs-up on: the warp drive sound fx; monsters on the ice planet; the designs for San Francisco, shipyards, Vulcan buildings, and men’s shirts on the Enterprise; Kirk’s womanizing; return of the miniskirt; Uhura in underwear! Thumbs-down on: recoiling phasers with bullets; porcupine-like Romulan ship; Romulans with stubble and tattoos; bridge of Enterprise; engineering of Enterprise; Orion girls as Starfleet cadets; having Kirk LITERALLY cheat to win the Kobayashi test. He should have “cheated” by exploiting some weakness in the computer’s programming or hardware, and come off as brilliant and resourceful. Instead he just comes off as a garden variety cheat.

298. Cris - May 10, 2009

Loved the film and highly recommended go ahead and watch it folks.

299. sodwind - May 10, 2009

It is not logical to make extended remarks on this new Star Trek. It is great! A magnificent work ! I have been a Trekie from seeing TOS when it was first on and continue to be one. This movie passes a torch to a new generation to boldly go in new ways. They have run that torch to new heights. Leonard Nimoy is not the only one to tear up at seeing the movie. Thanks to this new talented group for capturing what is Star Trek and proving that now and forever Star Trek lives. SUPERB!!!!

300. Arcadians - May 10, 2009

Loved it! A big thank you to Bob, Alex, JJ, and everyone involved – you just made the movie this Trekkie has been waiting years (and years) to see.
Keep ‘em coming!

301. John Carter - May 10, 2009

The cop at the beginning looks like the guards of the film THX 1138,
could it be a quote? The number on his mask, if I have read carefully,
is 924:
924 – subtract “1” to each number: so we have 8, 1 and 3:
the missing “1” is the number we used for the subtraction.

And: 9-2 (4) = 7, so 47 :)

302. pinky - May 10, 2009

So i decided that while in the line-up for the movie (which was truly, ridiculously short) i would write on a napkin the 10 things that made a movie Star Trek (in no particular order) and then do a run-down of whether they appeared in the new movie.

Before we begin, yes i enjoyed the movie but i have to agree with some that the over-stylization was irksome, though i LOVED the characters and enjoyed the big twists. Villain was a complete non-entity. If only Spock had gone back in time for a reason like Worf’s Alexander did in season 7 of TNG… something creative, imaginative, new. A villain out for revenge was boring and the writers showed that with their treatment of it.

1. NACELLE(S), SAUCER SECTIONS, ‘BRIDGE SHAPE’
Yep, everything was in place. Great Kelvin. Ugly Enterprise, EVEN in the movie. And both bridges were cluttered and impossible to see because there were too many reflections and the whites were irritating. Not like home. But, technically, all there. (0.5)

2. BEAMING
Yeah, there was tons of beaming people up and down and all sorts of fun instances of it. Did not like the new beaming effect, but at least it was used well. (0.9)

3. TRICORDERS, WARP, PHASERS, COMMUNICATORS
(STAR TREK-SPECIFIC TECH)
Whew, no lightsabers! But I can’t remember seeing a tricorder, either. Maybe when Spock beamed down to Vulcan? If there was one, it did not stand out. Which is probably for the best. There was also Lots of warp – loved the CLAP. Communicators were just fine. But the phasers? Dreadful. They fired in segmented beams and recoiled. I am of the school of belief that phasers were the only sci-fi weapons ever made that were scientifically accurate in their design… a phaser cannot recoil. And once the beam is broken from the barrel of the weapon, it must disappear. Phasers are dead. And for what? What the hell was the reason for this decision?? (0.75)

4. PRIMARY COLOUR UNIFORMS
Absolutely. Loved the uniforms, they were perfect. Shirt underneath was a beautiful idea and the added texture to the surfacing was appreciated. (1.0)

5. RANKS AND SPECIALTIES OF OFFICERS
Yeah, everyone was there. A few weird things about how quickly and how perfectly everyone fell into place. But, eh, whatever. Characters were good, and all used in their various positions. i’m still not sure where Uhura’s rank is visible though, without her sleeves. All is well here. (0.9)

6. PHILOSOPHY
Time Travel… how our pasts shape us. We are who we are because of who we’ve been. But it’s not all about experience, either. Nature’s involved as well. Destiny. Is there any universe where Kirk is not the Captain of a starship? is that his first, best destiny? his place? How much does the future shape the past? All that Spock Prime has experienced, how does it influence the way he functions in his past, the advice he gives his younger self, the appreciation he has for a moment spent on Delta Vega, where he might remember Kirk suffering on the Klingon prison colony return to that dear friend’s demise, but then meet Kirk again there ,,,, What else? ,,,,, Nero is accused of ‘genocide’, a word that holds fascinating connotations in the 20th Century. We love the Vulcans, their hand salute is even something Nimoy borrowed off a Jewish Rabi, and so the impact of that statement takes us back to World War II – puts us in the midst of the 6 million jews that were dehumanized and executed. The issues to be discussed here are immeasurable ,,,, What else? ,,,, Well, I mean, there were probably a few, but you really have to dig for them and you really have to expand them yourself with your own ideologies and thoughts and even outside examples. This movie didn’t make it very easy. There was no engagement on the part of the viewer during the film at all, either. Too fast. (0.7)

7. LITERARY REFERENCES (Shakespeare, Dickens)
There was a quote to Sherlock Holmes I noticed, where Spock says that “Once we’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.” I smiled at that. But then … it struck me as odd that the writers may instead have borrowed that oft quoted idea from TNG. And TNG, though they made beautiful use of literature, is not itself a literary source. I really noticed nothing else. (0.1)

8. DIFFERENT RACES, SHAPES, GENDERS
Well, we got a short guy in Scotty’s companion. We got a hick, too. We got an African American woman. We got a green woman. We got women all over the bridge. We got men – white, African American, Cuban, Chinese, Russian, and probably more. No overweight women. No strong women – Uhura was big-mouthed but by no means ‘strong’ or someone to look up to. There was an interracial kissing between Vulcan and African American woman. Yeah, you know, it looked like a Star Trek universe. Also, loved that the aliens essentially had more detailed and bigger prosthetics, but were not designed to be from a different show. Although… why did every alien head have to have a wide forehead and bigger eyes? X-Files, anybody? (0.8)

9. HOPE FOR HUMANITY
Yeah, you know, i hear a lot about this… but seriously? I guess the message was that everything’s going to turn out okay. But how they went about it, we had absolute scum for a hero, who basically bullied his way into command of a ship. And we trust him? Um, yeah, because he cheated on his exam. And tried to sexually assault a woman in a bar one night. Oh, and drove his stepdad’s car off a cliff. He’s a little shit. And though I went in with Pine as my favorite, I left feeling irritated by him. We saw only the worst of humanity here, and part of me felt like Nero. Weird, eh? A 2D villain and I was totally on his side! There has got to be a problem with that. So, No, not a lot of hope for humanity here, sorry. We’re still going to be the same callous, hedonist idiots we always were, forever. Sounds depressing. (0.4)

10. DIPLOMACY BEFORE CONFLICT
Oh yeah, like when Spock says he would rather kick the crap out of Nero than try to deal with it peacefully. Oh yeah, that had Star Trek written all over it. Everyone was constantly fighting. Nobody bothered talking. Talking is the lost art, I guess in this alternate universe. You have a problem, you jump on the guy and beat the balls off him. I mean, we can even have a trial, which seems reasonable, but it ends in name-calling and personal attacks. Wow, every exchange of different viewpoints here was an absolute SLAP in the face to Star Trek. In fact, as i recall, Roddenberry always liked the show more cerebral. The reason he added fights and goonery was because the bosses (those same bosses that thought a kiss between Kirk and Uhura would destroy TV forever) thought people could only understand goonery, anything else was too much effort. Well, we’re definitely back in the old days. (0.1)

So, the final score: 6.15 / 10

As a movie in general, ignorant of my Star Trek list, maybe I’d bump it up a little. But the score still wouldn’t dazzle anybody.

303. pinky - May 10, 2009

#209 –
Your CONCLUSION made me cry… because you’re so right.

304. afterace - May 10, 2009

Posted my short review on YT:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teq3QCorIhY

305. RetroWarbird - May 10, 2009

I just saw Star Trek.

While the film was enjoyable for film sake (I can totally distance myself from my Trekkie nature) it certainly doesn’t sit well with traditional Star Trek tropes.

There’s no talking. No time for sitting down and discussing what’s happening and making people think. I have great faith in audiences and think there are a lot of smart people out there … but honestly, being smart enough to process the interesting nature of the time travel, destiny, and Starfleet activity (and character interactions) when there isn’t a single moment where you can take a breath and get some exposition and philosophical discussion forces Trek novices to think faster than most of them will probably be comfortable doing. All for the sake of the “emotional roller-coaster”, which with parental deaths and planetary genocides, is going to be big anyway.

I will say that any scene with Nimoy injected the slower paced, more thoughtful aspects in regardless of how fast the rest of the movie outpaced him.

Now for the movie itself … I liked it. I thought many of the characters felt good in the roles. Kirk found his footing toward the end and it’s easy to see that in the next one, he might be a better Kirk. Things that will help that are obviously him being in command right away … a plot dealing with Klingons trying to arm pre-warp civilizations … and a woman he can’t have. Also, he needs to call people “Mister” a lot more. That’s the one Kirk trait you can’t throw away (Pine otherwise might have been a bit cynical and pushy, but had the determination, moral compass and dynamics of Kirk … if only he had the sheer confidence). Plot-wise, I do like his brash Kobayashi Maru cheating, and how it put him in direct conflict with Spock. That aspect seemed very logical.

Spock was a mixed bag for me, but a lot of that is more “Vulcans” were a mixed bag for me. The juxtaposition of Spock with Spock Prime was stark, and it gave a pretty good feel for the “pre-Trek” Spock and how he might’ve been in his earlier days. Also, of equal importance – I thought the reasons for joining Starfleet (only hinted at in TOS) were good choices, and I liked how at the Academy he seemed like Pike’s “go-to-guy”, which kind of lends credibility to the idea that Pike’s mission in “The Cage” and a few others has happened – Spock could’ve been serving on The Enterprise during a two-year shake down when they encountered Talos IV. The relationship with Uhura is odd, but fits oddly well into the new reality – it never would’ve flown in the old one. I’m curious how that will play if Nurse Chapel ever gets any face time next movie, beyond a shout-out from Bones.

Pike was cool. Greenwood impressed me with Pike. He seemed like a veteran Starship captain, almost a sort of “Picard” acting as a mentor but not being afraid to make some bold moves. You definitely get some of Spock’s affection for him which may ultimately play out in The Menagerie, although his role in recruiting Kirk is a welcome new twist. Beyond being a strong captain and luckily only having one episode’s shoes to fill really … he got to carve out a niche for the character. Side note … the Centauri Slug that Nero used to screw with Pike’s mind and spinal cord … correct me if I’m wrong … but that was TOTALLY a cameo from the parasitic bugs from TNG “Conspiracy” …

Karl Urban as Bones was my favorite part of the movie. The next one had better up him to equal importance in the trio of Kirk/Spock/McCoy, because he really nailed it. His surly friendship with Kirk was great, his scene where Spock allowed him to speak freely was probably my favorite in the whole movie (and also featured the best characterization of Spock as well!)

Anton Yelchin as Chekov was funnier than I expected, and actually … his role did something I’m not sure has ever happened – it clarified just exactly what the second man at the Con actually does. Sulu’s flying the damn ship … what’s Chekov doing? Well, he’s charting the courses on the star-charts and keeping tabs on Operations – notably, the away team.

I thought Zoe’s Uhura was alright, although I think the interesting aspects came from being an object of desire then an unlikely romance with Spock rather than actually being all that interesting herself. But she at least seemed competent, even though her specialties never actually became of any sort of use for this film.

I liked Simon Pegg as Scotty, but I did not like Scotty’s role, just because he wasn’t doing Scotty things in Scotty situations. If the next movie hopes to do any justice to Trek … Scotty had better be in a bar fight on a space station, and had otherwise better be tinkering with the engines. Speaking of engines … I had my doubts about the pipeworks style industrial look of engineering, but I thought it worked better than my initial thoughts gave it credit for. Just to continue that train of thought … the skydive onto the drilling platform was slightly “Away Mission” but Kirk on Delta Vega was totally NOT an Away Mission. We’ll be needing a real frigging Away Mission next time.

Ben Cross as Sarek was pretty stellar – the Vulcan school was really unique. Winona Ryder as Amanda was good … but while I’m all for new continuity opening up continuing new stories with no concerns … this pretty much cancels Star Trek IV from happening now … but that’s okay because from the point of view of time travel they REALLY dropped the ball. Spock totally could have just hidden the Jellyfish in orbit around the Romulan star that supernovas in the future, and set it on a predetermined timed setting to save Romulus back in the future, thereby preventing the entire problem from happening. (Or maybe he couldn’t have, since technically … the “black hole style time travel” led to an alternate reality rather than a true time travel instance.

I thought John Cho’s Sulu seemed off. I like the action bits just fine, but I just can’t buy into a Sulu without the deepest voice on the Earth … it’s too weird.

I thought the loss of the Rura Penthe scene was absurd. They cut it because it “went off on a tangent” and was too far from the main conflict? You kidding? The entire movie is all over the place and frantic … five more minutes to clarify what Nero has done for 25 years isn’t going to hurt.

Now, as for the symbolism of Vulcan’s destruction … it at least guarantees new spins in the “New Trek” continuity. The similarity between it and say, the Jewish Holocaust kind of lent themselves to comparisons, yes … and also – Nimoy talking about having found a “suitable colony site” kind of gives you a comparison to Israel. And we all know that Israel isn’t exactly a peaceful settlement where the Israelis have been free to continue unharmed … I expect the site of the future Vulcan colony could be a point of contention in the Galaxy, and a place that remains difficult to keep safe.

Which defies Trek logic, since they should theoretically just be able to resettle on P’Jem or something …

But there is a precedent now to kind of have some “real, modern world comparisons” in the next chapters so that Trek maintains its sense of relevance and gives maybe some moral lessons about the world’s issues.

Now, if they’d have Andoria go all “Right Wing” and try to secede from the Federation, there’d be some decent story opportunities (even if it’s all, technically in a “Yesterday’s Enterprise” style setting. In fact, if that was how the next movie played out – with the Enterprise halting explorations because the Klingons were arming Andoria for a violent secession from the Federation due to Vulcan’s moving too close to their territory? It would play a HECK of a lot like Russia arming the small nations bordering Israel and the Federation, like America, would have to step in. It could be a neat analogue (if done right)

Otherwise? I think they definitely sacrificed some of Roddenberry’s optimism for action and badassitude and I think that was a mistake … but it didn’t totally ruin the movie, and there was at least an “underlying” hopefulness and faith that could be better served later.

So between the decent characterizations, the good effects, the decent villain and the fresh start (and possible great opportunities for young writers) I can ALMOST forgive the nonsensical way that the Time Travel is wonky, the direction is a little too frantic, and there isn’t enough dragging, boring, dull, talky parts (in my opinion, one of the best parts of Trek). I also admit I’m actually more curious to see what writers do with the new status quo of the Romulan Star Empire in 24th Century stuff, now that they’re all nomadic and destroyed and hateful.

I’d go so far as to give it a 7 or 7.5 out of 10, and to find a rank for it amidst the movies.

1. The Wrath of Khan.
2. The Undiscovered Country.
3. The Search for Spock.
4. The Voyage Home.
5. Star Trek.
6. First Contact.
7. Generations.
8. Insurrection.
9. The Motion Picture.
10. Nemesis.
11. The Final Frontier.

And lastly, I’ll just say … that it was an enjoyable watch and I appreciate a lot of this new Star Trek (even with the major nitpicks of a fanboy) … but beyond that … this in NO WAY satisfied my need for more Trek these days. But then again … what 2 hour, intellectually shallow adaptation of Trek would?

306. Rando - May 10, 2009

I really wanted to be optomistic about this movie but… This Isnt Star Trek its a money makeing Sham!!!
What is the problem with throwing a bit of glitter for beaming? Not sure if a spoiler but if it hadnt been for the arty farty rings alternate reality spock’s mother would still be alive!
Kirk Spends most of his time on the floor in fights(?) , where was the drop kick as well?
the phaser cannons are useless as well its nice that u get to see them close up but they are rubish. wht was wrong with the old style one long burst not alot of little puffy ones?
OML wht was with the gleam off a futureistic crappy consol everytime that camera moved on the bridge, i mean come on get a new lighting guy/ Director !!!
and all the stars have been bigging up their rols in this film but none of them get any screen time its just Action Action Action!!!
THERE WAS NO STORY LINE!!! All i had to do was listen to Leonard tell me it in Five Seconds in the middle.

so overal i give this film a 6/10 poor show for a re-boot

307. Jeff Howick - May 10, 2009

Great movie! Best I’ve ever seen.

308. VahallaVixen - May 10, 2009

I saw Star Trek on Mother’s Day. I’m not going into a dissertation on it, but to say that if the die-hards don’t like it, they must remember 1 thing – this became an ulternate universe the moment the Romulans entered the anomalie. If go along those lines, when the Borg Queen went back in time to destory man kind, she also changed history, as did Kirk and Spock et al when they went back in time to save the whales in ST IV. I give it a 10/10

309. RetroWarbird - May 10, 2009

I’ll just help some people’s thought processes here …

1. I know the movie doesn’t exactly explain it … but people, the TOS, Movies, and 24th Century TNG, DS9 and VOY stuff is still all legit. This is a parallel dimension.

We’ve all seen “Yesterday’s Enterprise” and we all know that a temporal anomaly can lead to a more dramatic, action packed history with different looks and effects … so ultimately, we might as well call this new movie “Star Trek: Yesterday’s Enterprise II” or “Yesterday’s Enterprise-A” or “Yesterday’s TOS” or something.

The Prime Universe still exists, and no doubt will continue to exist in comics and the Star Trek: Online MMO. That being said … this new movie should give us an ample opportunity to “write in” to Paramount and frigging DEMAND a four hour TNG/DS9 crossover Direct-to-DVD movie that wraps up all the lingering threads from TNG and DS9 (with some VOY cameos).

2. Spock Prime watching the destruction of Vulcan from Delta Vega is TOTALLY fine. I assumed that the Romulans set up a holographic projector and broadcast the image to him. After all, in the first scene with Robau they made a big point of the Romulans showing Spock’s face and the Jellyfish on little holograms … and later on when Nero was ranting to Pike, we saw him conjure up a hologram of his dead wife. So for Spock, they threw a big holographic broadcast of the destruction of Vulcan, live at midnight tonight …

3. People keep mentioning the Centauri Slug and thinking it’s a Ceti Eel but like I mentioned above … a close look at the thing shows that this thing is very, VERY similar to the hostile parasites that took over Starfleet Command in TNG “Conspiracy” … and learning that 25th Century Romulans might have access to those things could play out very diabolically in Post-Nemesis Prime Universe. So those things are “Centauri Slugs” … (that in addition to the Countdown mention that the Roms have redesigned some Borg tech and are all going terrorist style spells out trouble for Beta Quadrant … what’s next, resurrecting Vendorian shapeshifters to assassinate key Federation players?)

310. Almostperfect - May 10, 2009

Oh, and one more thing: That’s James Tiberius Kirk they’re writing scenes for. Greater Romulan or Vulcan strength or no, JT Kirk does the ass kicking in this neck of the stars, folks. Unless he has a good reason for letting himself take a beating. Let’s get that right next time, huh?

The writers would do well to have a look at some old films of Aikido founder Morihei Ueshiba, very small man, taking on and subduing much larger and physically stronger opponents. Anyone who does martial arts will know what to do when someone has a death grip on your throat like Kirk was treated to a few times. So the Shatner Kirk is definitely more well trained in hand to hand than this one seems to be.

311. Weerd1 - May 10, 2009

297- I was actually rather taken with how Kirk cheats. He’s not cheating because he has to win, he’s cheating to show his disdain for the idea the test exists. It’s his commentary on the idea the test is a waste of time because he believes in the real world there are no “no-win” scenarios.

312. Randy H. - May 10, 2009

Saw the movie yesterday. I still don’t like the design of the portions of engineering we saw in the Enterprise, but the overall film was just wonderful! It fully fits within canon (as much as any film can), and is entertaining to boot! Generating a restart of the franchise with the original crew was, in many respects, a no-win situation. I’m glad that the creators of this film didn’t accept that.

With great respect and much thanks to all involved, I look forward to where this timeline and alternate universe take us.

313. quacks5 - May 10, 2009

I know it wasn’t supposed to be my father’s Trek (though dad never admited to liking Star Trek), but it wasn’t _my_ Trek, either. I know hitting the history eraser button means never having to worry about continuity. I’m willing to believe the changes to the timeline could explain why this Kirk grows up as a bitter young man and rebel rather than the uptight, duty-bound Kirk from TOS. The timeline shift could even explain some divergences in overall Federation history. But I don’t buy that the _Kelvin_ getting destroyed caused Spock to start dating a student. Scott’s character especially didn’t ring true. (If our Scott had been assigned to a remote outpost he would have kept himself busy reading tech manuals and would have complained about the lack of whisky before the lack of decent food. Oh, and he wasn’t such a buffoon.) I could nitpick more, but why bother, since it’s an alternate reality.

What a wasted opportunity, because seeing the history of our original characters could have been so fun, so fascinating. Instead, we got a presentation based on Star Trek, but not the real thing.

So, what about the movie when viewed distinct from the Trek universe?

The silliest thing to me was that they couldn’t come up with a better name for the magic sauce than “Red Matter”? I guess “deus ex machina” was already taken. Something about “red matter” just brought that whole suspension of disbelief thing to a crashing halt for me. I guess there’s a place for technobabble after all.

I found Nero to be an unconvincing, flat villian. All we know about his motivation was a second-hand flashback. For someone angry enough (or insane enough) to destroy whole planets he seemed rather low-key.

But if you get past the implausable plot and the even more implausible coincidences, it had its moments. There were some amazing space scenes. The bridge was cooler than I had expected based on stills. Though the characters weren’t the ones I’ve known and loved for years, they were interesting. (Obnoxious and somewhat disturbing at times, but interesting.) I enjoyed the signature quotes and the inside jokes. The good guys beat the bad guys despite the odds. It was fun. It was fluff. Just don’t expect me to watch it again.

I sure hope Spock Prime manages to restores the timeline. I’d hate to think this is how it all turned out.

314. Jefferies Tuber - May 10, 2009

How disappointing to read some of the shit on this board.

I think this board proves once and for all that narcissism is not the exclusive domain of Wm. Shatner.

315. Warren Baxter - May 10, 2009

Star Trek (2009)

This is not your fathers Star Trek. That much is certain. Hell, it is not even my Star Trek! I grew up with TNG and DS-9 (my fav, by the way). “Techno babble” was the norm and became all too often the solution to get the crew out of a dicey situation. Toward the end of Voyager, it became ridiculous. Non-fans never had a chance of jumping on board without knowing how a matter/anti-matter reactor works. Why do I bring this up? ST-09 is essentially bereft of such dialogue. So is that a good thing–definitely.

J.J. Abrams has managed to accomplish something of magnitude, of heft, that Jonathan Frakes and Stuart Baird could not come close to doing. For the first time since The Voyage Home, Star Trek is accessible to everyone in the movie-going audience. How do I know this? Not one of my family members has ever been to a Star Trek movie with me. Sure, they have seen the DVDs or an episode in passing, but never once in a theatre. This morning, they were all there because they were genuinely excited to see ST-09.

Let us split the Star Trek community into three types of fans:

1) those who have seen Star Trek in the theaters or watched it on television
2) those who have seen every movie that has opened in their lifetime and seen nearly every episode of every show
3) those who have seen every hour of Star Trek, own the DVDs, can quote lines, know nearly every story line, flown out to Vegas for three days just for the Experience and know how the fictional technology works.
Which one am I? Number three, through and through. I consider myself one of the die-hard fans who know why Kirk, Spock and Bones would go on shore leave together. I know the motivations behind Picard’s decision to evacuate the Enterprise-E and activate the self-destruct. I know why Sisko went to the Bajoran Fire Caves alone and I understand why Janeway made the decision to get lost in the Delta Quadrant. I spent my youth studying the Encyclopedia written by Mike & Denise Okuda and writing a screenplay (I was going to film it with my friends in my parents’ living room when I was 14 years old).

After all that and much more, this new Star Trek film, after the first six minutes, became my favorite. In the first six minutes, I experienced an emotional roller coaster that left me with tears in my eyes. Watching George Kirk sacrifice himself for his crew, the love of his life and, most importantly, his son was both inspiring and heart wrenching. It was at that point that I strapped myself in and prepared for the ride that would be Star Trek.

Stylized, as it may have been, ST-09 brought the level of excitement, production, intensity, emotion and acting that the franchise has been lacking of late. It was, at the same time, new, shiny, familiar, and worn. While so much of this film I could list as my favorite, a few aspects immediately jump off the screen for me. For instance, the fact that Budweiser and Nokia still exist in the 23rd Century is an astonishing concept but so far-fetched that I could not believe it. The level of humor injected into the most unexpected of scenes was great! I have never laughed so much in a Star Trek movie.

The movie was not wholly without flaw, however, what film ever is? Without reading the Countdown comic, one might not a full understanding of Nero’s motivation. As a friend was quick to point out, his motivation, even after reading Countdown, was paper-thin at its best and weak at its worst. Did that detract from the movie as a whole? I do not believe so. The threat that Nero posed with his Romulan/Borg upgraded mining ship was real, as were the consequences of the action. So often in Star Trek films and episodes the stakes are said to be high but we never get to see the ramifications if the big baddie succeeds. The closest we got was, once again, The Voyage Home, when Earth itself was at the whim of an alien probe.

The sacrifice of Vulcan was a refreshing realization that even the enemies with weak motivations can wreak havoc. While I am not happy that Vulcan was destroyed, I understand why J.J. and the writers felt it necessary. As Spock Prime mentioned at the end, however, hope is not lost for the Vulcan people.

While I do not intend to dissect every scene of this movie (probably going to be impossible until I get the Blu-Ray anyway), I will point out that Gene Roddenberry’s vision is safe. Starfleet is still on a mission of peace and exploration and the Federation remains a haven of idealism and hope for the future. The prime timeline still exists in a way and I am sure if there is a compelling reason to revisit it that will garner the care and attention it deserves, we will see it. Until that moment, however, I look forward to more adventures with J.J. Abrams, Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, Michael Giacchino and the many others it took to put this film in theaters.

I absolutely love Star Trek. Out of 10 Stars, it gets 9.5 from me!

–Warren Alan Baxter

warrenabaxter@aol.com
http://www.myspace.com/wab1701
http://www.twitter.com/wab1701
Visit me on Facebook!

316. Almostperfect - May 10, 2009

Regarding the score, I really just thought it was adequate. I think in part this was the fault of trailer #3. The third trailer was spectacular and it created a much more dramatic impression with original music not written by Giacchino that the movie didn’t deliver.

As my disappointment fades I would probably call this a mediocre story with implausible and heavily contrived elements, and a movie with spectacular elements and a fantastic new cast that I loved.

317. cagmar - May 10, 2009

#314 Jefferies Tuber –

That’s a real general attack with no specific target. Kind of a “Fire everything!” moment.

I really hope all the wild-eyed lovers get your message. ?

I mean, if you don’t say anything about issues you had when watching the film, then they might as well make the same mistakes next time, eh? This WAS a sort of experiment and I’m sure Orci, Kurtzman, Abrams and everyone else would love to hear decent critiques. I know they want to make an even better movie next time. So I love people who give Star Trek less than 10 but don’t explain their issues with it. I also love people who give it a 10 even though they had very relevant and important issues. The fact is, the majority of people here have worthwhile things to say – not you, apparently. So let them say it. We would all do to listen to critiques now and again, both positive and negative.

318. Billy Bobby - May 10, 2009

317

This WAS a sort of experiment and I’m sure Orci, Kurtzman, Abrams and everyone else would love to hear decent critiques.

I really wish that were true.

“We stand behind this film and firmly believe that in a few years, it will seem just as dated and cornball as previous Star Trek films.”

-Paramount Pictures

319. falcon - May 10, 2009

My review – 8.75 out of 10. Okay, just kidding – I just threw that number out there. But it was quite good, and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

There were a couple of times when I thought a character might have acted a little out of character, but I had to remind myself that this movie took place in an alternate reality. (It feels like we’ve been living in an alternate reality ourselves for several years, but I digress.)

Without resorting to spoilers, I will say that there are moments in this movie that are quite emotional, and others that are quite shocking. There were many genuinely humorous moments, not forced, and much character drama.

There are also quite a few “WTF?” moments, and one in particular when it appears that Kirk got a comeuppance from Uhura.

The biggest gripe I have is with the music. It had that epic, bigger-than-life feeling, but it just wasn’t that much “Star Trek” to me. The end theme was a nice nod, and there was a small bit of the Spock music from STIII that snuck its way into a couple of places. But the music developed for Kirk seemed to morph into the music for the Enterprise as the movie moved on – was that intentional, to show the destined connection between Kirk and his ship, or did Michael Giacchino get lazy? Anyway, there were times when that theme was quite dramatic, and others when I’d rather have heard Alexander Courage’s famous fanfare. It just didn’t seem like that music belonged in a Star Trek movie. But if that’s the biggest gripe I have, I believe the movie did its job.

I saw the movie with my dad and my son-in-law, so there were three generations of us watching the film. My dad and I saw the first TOS episode, “The Man Trap,” together on Sept. 8, 1966, and seeing this movie with him had this same vibe. My son-in-law never saw the original series, but watched TNG with his dad, but he was familiar with the characters and remarked how much this movie was really “Star Trek.” I would consider that high praise for this film – that, and the fact it made $76 million in its opening weekend.

I will be seeing it again, and will be buying the DVD when it’s released.

320. STXI - May 10, 2009

Relax! I grew up with TOS in syndication, and didn’t really follow TNG until it was in syndication, and so forth, so forth, etc. I still follow ST for its entertainment value, and this film was the most entertaining and thrilling I have seen. I liked it, how long before we see STXII?

321. sean - May 10, 2009

I saw the film on an IMAX screen today, and I have to say I was very, very pleased. After First Contact, Trek movies became less and less exciting to attend, and by the time Nemesis came out attending a Trek flick became perfunctory. Thank you JJ/Bob/Alex for changing that!

The actors – amazing. Each one absolutely effin’ nailed it. Even Simon Pegg, who I was worried might play it too comically. His little alien pal was funny but not distracting (and certainly not an Ewok/Jar Jar-sized distraction/trainwreck). Everyone was just spot on without being imitations or copies. Pine WAS Kirk, Quinto WAS Spock. No questions, no hesitations. And Ben Cross was excellent as Sarek. I think Mark Lenard would have been proud. The moments between Sarek & Spock were some of the best in the entire film.

References to Treks gone by – The little touches such as the sound effects on the bridge were just awesome. What a treat for fans! The communicator chirps, the sounds of buttons, the transporter – all fantastic and not anachronistic at all. Even the eerie whistle from TOS when they’d visit an alien world, if you listen carefully in the Delta Vega sequence it’s right there. And I know many complained that the score lacked Courage’s theme throughout, but if you were listening carefully the 3 opening notes of the fanfare are played in several places throughout the film (such as when the shuttle carrying cadets leaves the Iowa Shipyards).

For everyone complaining about contrivances or questionable motivations – look back at 43 years of Star Trek and you’ll realize you’ve seen greater stretches of credibility.

Nero – Though I’d have liked to see more of him, I think he was an effective antagonist. I’ve heard his motivation is supposedly ‘flimsy’, yet we all seem to accept Kahn blaming Kirk for his plight, despite the fact that Kirk could have either killed or imprisoned Kahn, and court-martialed Marla McGivers. Instead, he offered Kahn a chance. That Kahn blamed Kirk for his own inability to protect his wife makes no more sense than Nero blaming Spock as a representative of Vulcan and the Federation and thus the focus of his rage for their failure to protect Romulus. I’d say Nero’s motives here actually make more sense, as he was going to destroy the worlds of the Federation (and eventually the Klingon Empire, presumably) in order to strengthen a future Romulan Empire. He merely wanted to punish Spock in the way he had been punished by watching his world die. What exactly was Kahn going to do with Genesis? There’s never any explanation, yet we’ve accepted it all these years. Kruge seemed to have a much better motive for snagging Genesis.

Transwarp Beaming – Scotty doesn’t transport Kirk & himself half way across the galaxy. It’s strongly implied the Enterprise is still in or near the Vulcan system, and Delta Vega is obviously within the Vulcan system (as Spock witnesses Vulcan’s destruction from the surface). The transwarp beaming has to do with transporting on board a moving target. It doesn’t defeat the use of starships. And is obviously something of a dangerous prospect as Scotty could have materialized within a bulkhead just as easily as he materialized in the water reclamation pipes (or whatever those were).

The instantaneous promotions – Uhura’s assignment to communications because of her greater experience with the dialects involved made sense. Scotty clearly had a greater rank than most of the crew on board. The CMO was killed, so McCoy taking over made sense. Neither Sulu nor Chekov were dept heads, so no issues there, and Spock was already a Commander (or was it Lt Cmdr, I wasn’t clear on that). Kirk being promoted from promising cadet to Capt was a stretch. I can’t make any bones about it (and it was an issue I was worried about before going in). However, he had just saved Earth and quite possibly the Federation from destruction. Along with Pike & Spock’s recommendation, maybe it’s not so crazy (after all, Kirk was pardoned from major intergalactic offenses in TVH after saving Earth).

My only real complaints with the film would be that I’d have liked to have seen the Rura Penthe scenes, and possibly more elements of Countdown incorporated into the prologue in order to flesh out the story. I also think it would be appropriate to apply the brakes a bit in the sequel. The film’s breakneck pace were great and a welcome change from the enjoyable but often plodding Treks of years past, but I would like to step off the gas for #2. I’d also have loved to see more of Amanda and perhaps those cut scenes with baby Spock, but I know editing is a tricky thing. The movie really breezed by and I couldn’t believe it was 2 hours!

In the end – TREK IS BACK, BABY! I’m already hungry for a sequel.

322. Keep the Faith - May 10, 2009

I work full time and also care for my mom with Alzheimer’s at night and on the weekends. As a result, I don’t have a chance to get to the movies. However today I made special arrangements to get some relief and go see Star Trek.

For a few hours (I actually saw it twice, back-to-back), I had a chance to exhale from the strains of being an Alzheimer’s’ caregiver and lose myself in what makes Star Trek great.

From a life-long Trek fan: Really good movie.

Right up there with The Wrath of Khan.
“Well done” to all involved.

Caring for someone with Alzheimer’s requires you to be strong and not let them see that your heart is breaking. If they see you in pain, it can make their condition worse. You sometimes have to suppress your emotions … not unlike one of our favorite characters from the Star Trek universe.

Spok’s relationship to his mother, and Zachary Quinto’s portrayal of the strain that comes from suppressing one’s emotions spoke to me.

All the nit-picky criticisms from obsessive cannonistas are just that.
The movie was really well done. All the actors were great.

JJ and crew, thanks for a few hours of fun.

323. Z Remorca - May 10, 2009

Just saw the film yesterday, and i have to admit: this has got to be the best incarnation of Trek that I have seen! I just couldn’t help leaving the theater with a big smile on my face. Although there were a lot of stuff that felt kinda “hammered in” just to make some reference to the classic stuff, the film as a whole really made Trek relevant again. The thing that made this movie a lot better to the previous one, which was slightly similar, was the fact that they showed a lot of character development. IN JUST 2 HOURS PEOPLE! :)) the point is, Orci and Kurtzmann really did a good job showing how the Kirk/Spock dynamic evolved from being 2 people loathing each other’s guts to finishing each other’s sentences. And the ending! Oh wow… I can’t stop raving about the ending! Everything just felt so perfect that waiting for 2011 is sooooooooooo hard to do.

All in all, J.J. Abrams and co. did a very good job resurrecting Trek. Can’t wait to see it again. :D

Movie rating: 10/10

324. Alex Rosenzweig - May 10, 2009

Greetings!

I’ve seen the film 3 times so far. Paid for it once. That may be it. We’ll see.

I’ll keep this sort of short for now, ’cause it’s late and out club just finished a recruiting/PR op at the theater all weekend.

Overall… About a 7 out of 10.

High points: The characters and performances. Awesome! Really great, with special note to Karl Urban for is portrayal of McCoy, and Bruce Greenwood for his portrayal of Pike. But, really, the entire cast was excellent, and just plain fun to watch.

Other good points: Cinematography and pacing were excellent. Solid direction by Mr. Abrams. The film is just very pretty. The dialogue is solid, with a lot of good lines and humor. Well done in that respect. Visual effects were also really excellent, though the exterior of the Enterprise–which wasn’t awful, and looks better in motion than just sitting still–was still such that I didn’t for a minute believe that the original ship, given a comparable level of detail, wouldn’t have worked just as well, and maybe better.

Hit-and-miss points: Some production design was quite slick. The Vulcan scenes, lots of San Francisco and the Academy, and the Narada were very nice. I thought a lot of the Enterprise and Kelvin were really a bit overdone on the bridges and in the corridors, but those didn’t bother me too much (except for the windows; bad idea, even though the viewer overlays were pretty cool!). But… the lower decks/engineering/shuttlebay areas… Yuck! Okay, we know they were shot in buildings. Problem was, they looked it! They just didn’t look or feel like the advanced sorts of hardware an interstellar spacecraft would be using. It also looked really obvious that in those areas, the interior spaces didn’t seem at all to match the exteriors of the ships. For next time, it’d be worth it to spend some money to make engineering and shuttlebay sets that would maintain the verisimilitude.

Not-so-good points: The whole alternate universe thing…again, yuck! It wasn’t necessary, and the temptation to do it should have been resisted. That said, what actually startled me about the film was now many times the plot asked me to suspend disbelief on some really odd stuff, like Earth and Vulcan being really minimally defended. Not gonna happen! And without that suspension of disbelief, the story logic starts falling apart. I’ve been thinking about it over the past couple of days, and it wouldn’t have been that hard to fix all that, really. Ahh, well.

(BTW, really big giant raspberry to whichever of the writers decided that blowing up Vulcan was a good idea. Wrong! I hated that aspect of the film. I was willing to go with almost all the rest of the changes, but that was a real showstopper for me.)

So, there were a lot of good points, and some serious bad points, too, which prevented me from really rating the film as more than a 7. Still and all, I had fun with it; I just felt that the fun works better if I don’t think too much about the plot-logic, or about the long-term ramifications of the story, and I don’t feel I should have to put that qualifier in to consider a movie fun.

In closing, I said months ago that I felt that this story could have been told in such a way as to result in a universe functionally indistinguishable from that of TOS, if the writers had cared to do so. (Yes, I know full-well that they deliberately chose not to do that, and I disagree with that creative choice most strongly.) After watching the film, I am now quite certain that that feeling is true. I intend to prove it, for my own amusement, if nothing else. I may also share it, if people want. :) As of my viewing today, I’m pretty sure I’ve figured out how to resolve all the conundra involved with supporting my assertion. Took some thought, but it worked well. Partially it’s a testament to the work that *did* go into the script that it was fairly easy to solve what I felt were the film’s serious problems. OTOH, if I could figure it out in two days, why couldn’t two very talented screenwriters do so in a few months? (Or was it just that they didn’t care to do so?)

325. Harry Ballz - May 10, 2009

Where is Stanky’s review?

326. Nix - May 10, 2009

Star Trek 5 is suddenly a very very VERY GOOD Star Trek film.

327. BTH - May 11, 2009

I suppose we should be grateful Gene is now in space and not in the ground… “In Space, No One Can Hear You Roll Over” but then again… maybe… one can only hope…

328. Devon - May 11, 2009

327 – Low brow shot out of desperation. Keep stooping!

329. Marcus Coull - May 11, 2009

Marcus from Sydney,Australia.I saw the film this Saturday just past with friends and family and over all we found it to be very good,well O.K, Excellent!!We rated it from 8 to 10.Good plot to start a new franchise with.The Vulcan home world element was totally unexpected.Won’t say anymore about that for those that haven’t seen the movie yet.For those that have,I never would have thought of that take.Special FX were fantastic as you would expect of Startrek!!Like a lot of people early on I found my veiw of the new Enterprise being a bit Slow to take it on.Why couldn’t they have something more like the origional.I have,however now warmed up to the new shape.Got no choice now anyway,have we..All the actors played the caracters well.My only real concern was the way the love intrest was delt with and the carecters used.Of special note is Karl Urbans potrayal of McCoy.I tell you,with my eyes closed,I could almost hear Deforest Kelley in his voice..I have heard that the team has already agreed to do several more films but what I would love to see is if they can make a new and fresh T.V. series..Live Long and Prosper people!!!

330. CJS - May 11, 2009

Star Trek (8/10)

Early on as I was watching the new Star Trek movie I had decided that I liked it. But, I liked it in the same way that I liked the new Battlestar Galactica, Babylon 5 or Firefly, in other words, as something other than Star Trek. But then Leonard Nimoy showed up, and all of the stylistic and narrative differences that had seemed to separate this movie from the 1960’s TV series that spawned it were gone. Star Trek was Star Trek again.

Director J.J. Abrams and his production staff have definitely created something that is stylistically distinct from all of the earlier incarnations of Star Trek. In many ways it exceeds the simple ‘alternate reality’ conceit that the film uses to explain the character/narrative diversions from the original series. But it all seems to work very well, and there is enough of the soul of Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the other characters in the film’s performances for us to accept them. These characters engage us in new and fresh ways.

The plot, of course, is paper-thin and unfolds in a generally predictable manner. But this film is less about plot than both reintroducing and redefining the Star Trek characters. Although clichés abound in the ‘rebel without a cause’ redefinition of young Jim Kirk, and there was little clever or original enough in his reprogramming of the Kobayshi Maru test to warrant a commendation for original thinking, Chris Pine is likable, and suggests enough of the brashness and cleverness of Kirk for us to accept him in the role. As for Spock and McCoy, both Zachary Quinto and Karl Urban inhabit these characters as well as Leonard Nimoy and Deforest Kelly did. Zoe Saldana brings something quite new to the character of Uhura, and those who question the new nature of the relationship between Uhura and Spock should check out the chemistry between them in the classic episode Charlie X.

As villains go, Nero is no Khan, though apparently he shares the same motivation. And the appearance of the monster from Cloverfield on an icy Delta Vega (which is clearly a moon of Vulcan now) was as pointless as the dune buggy ride in Nemesis (a Star Trek film you never want to copy). Fortunately these little excursions into jeopardy for jeopardy’s sake do not burn up too much of the film’s running time. And if Scotty’ little alien friend is supposed to be the new Jar-Jar Binks, we can be thankful that he also has little screen time and absolutely no dialogue.

Science, of course, has always taken a beating in Star Trek (Warp Drive, Transporters, the Genesis Device, etc.), and despite the presence of science advisors in the credits there is little indication of anything based on scientific reality in this film. The set design lacks subtlety altogether as we are treated to an overly bright and shiny bridge on one hand and an engineering section that looks like a 1950’s era waterworks on the other. And Kirk’s sudden ascension to Enterprise captain from mere cadet also seems absurd, no matter how many planets he saved.

Although not a perfect film by any measure (the Firefly sequel Serenity remains the superior sci-fi action film based on a TV series), the new Star Trek succeeds at rebooting what had become, to the mainstream, a tired and worn out franchise. Let’s just hope that for the sequel they more closely follow the example of The Dark Knight than that of Quantum of Solace.

331. DS9 Rocks - May 11, 2009

I give the movie a 7/10. In words, it was awesome, well-done and well-acted. The detractions which lowered the score have to do with Trek plot points and couple of other imperfections. I respect canon, but was prepared to let it go whenever it was necessary to make the new movie work. I thought several places the movie went too far off the path without a specific reason. To break it down:

Acting: Superb–no qualms here. Everyone nailed their characters, from the main cast to all the supporting roles. Well done.

Plot: Well done. Thought-out, tight, fast-paced. From the big picture point of view, the plot was flawless. From Trek point of view, I was a little suprised by all the critics reviews saying that the “spirit” of Trek was back. If the spirit is exploring strange new worlds and seeking out new life and new civilizations, I am not sure how this movie fits in. Now, that’s every Star Trek movie (good or bad)–a villain, an existensial threat and enterprise crew defeating it all. But I, IV, VI, VIII and IX had the theme of hope break through. While others (including beloved II) did not, that didn’t matter too much, because the movies were continuation of the TV series that already showed the character of the crew and what they are all about. But not anymore–we have no clue what this crew and this Federation are all about. Will we ever see them exploring? I *hope* so.

Directing: Can’t complain–I couldn’t catch my breath, and my emotions were touched in many places. Great blockbuster-type directing.

Visuals: Forget about it. What’s there is best ever. However, given the budget and capabilities, I wish there were more outdoor locations, and wish those that were shown would have been grander. I’ll never forget the fire plains of Vulcan from TMP–there was no reason not to show something like that. The only well done outside location was San Francisco, and even that was shown only for a few seconds.

Hanging Together. It all hangs together very well, with just a few glaring (to me) wrinkles that really didn’t need to be there. And that’s my issue with them–there are many wrinkles of course, but most are necessary for the reboot. The two that weren’t are Delta Vega and Kirk’s promotion to full captain at the end. Delta Vega generally is a minor point in the movie–however, it ties together several subplots, thus becoming more important than it should have been. And since this 2 minute scene is rife with self-inconsistency, it simply jumps out at you. It’s all been said before–its location is screwed up, it happens to be the place where Nero maroons Spock Prime AND where regular Spock ejects Kirk, AND it’s also where Scotty lives for the time being (plus it is home to the Cloverfield monster’s cousin). The second problem is just as unnecessary and I think worse in effect–Kirk obviously had to be captain for the movie, and I am happy to buy that he gets to be acting captain through the chain of events that unfolds. But, there was absolutely no reason to promote him to full captain at the VERY end. Just give him a medal, and deal with it in the next movie. Keep it open. Why close up the possibilities? He could have been first officer for Admiral Pike or whatever next time. As many said, getting to have the rank of captain fresh out of academy is simply ridiculous. Pike says in this movie that it takes 4 years to be captain. Kirk could have made in 2 or 3 or something, but not in 1 week. And next movie will likely take place a bit after this one, so it would have been perfect for the promotion. And again, most importantly, it wasn’t necessary. Plus, there is something about an older person being captain. I buy Pine’s young Kirk just fine, but I don’t buy him as captain yet. He is too young. I connected much better emotionally with Capt. Rabau of the Kelvin.

To close–the couple of (admittedly nitpicky) issues aside, movie was spectacular. I can’t wait for the next one, and hope some of the wrinkles are smoothed out (and we get more outside locations!). My only real worry is whether Pine grows into a true Captain of the Federation flagship. He hasn’t yet, despite getting the ship.

332. Digginjim - May 11, 2009

Hi trekmovie and all fans who have posted reviews here. Heres my 2 cents…

I saw the movie in central London on Saturday 9th May at 17.30. The theatre was packed with all sorts of people – kids, teenagers, parents, older folks, fans, nerds and geeks!

Having been a low intensity ST fan since I was a kid and having become thoroughly bored with the franchise during the DS9, Voyager, Ent and later STTNG movies I had high hopes… and big fears… I took along the wife who has absolutely no idea about trek….

In short – we both LOVED the movie. My partner was engaged by the plot, loved the characters and we were both moved. In fact, we both felt an enormous impact from the Kelvin sequence – incredibly well done and very moving… dare I admit it – we both had tears in our eyes…. JJ has done the impossible! The tears in my eyes were partly from amazement that the franchise I loved as a kid had suddenly sprung back to life in front of my eyes…. the irreverence, the humour, the action, the joy of these characters and their relationships…

what more can I say….? As a movie I thought it could have lost 15 minutes and not suffered – it did drag a bit towards the end….

but really – I can forgive this – Star Trek is back – and I’m a very happy fan.

PEACE

333. cathie_bigissue - May 11, 2009

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

334. Remington Steele - May 11, 2009

Hey Everyone,

I’ve not read any of the fan reviews but based on comments on the main news stories, its generally accepted as being a classic.

I recall a few times I got into arguments with people on this site about this movie advising anyone with any issues to wait until the film is released and then have an opinion.

And I stand by that.

And now I have seen the movie.

What I am about to write is my opinion. If people want to have a go at me, then fine but after i write this, I wont be coming back to read this page again!

Let me get one thing straight, I am a Star Trek fan. Have been since I was born.

So onto the movie:

Good – Yes.
Excellent – No.
Best of the Bunch – Not at all
Better than The Wrath of Khan – No Chance in Hell

For the first 40 or so minutes, this movie is actually quite good.

Then the destruction of Vulcan occurred and the movie went a bit insane really.

I felt the actors did fine, the best approximation was Karl Urban’s McCoy who I felt was brilliant. The look and feel of everything, down to the viewsceens being windows i thought had a touch of class about it.

But there are better qualified people to speak about the merits, probably hundreds before me on this page and in the media.

So Im just gonna jump straight to where I felt the movie let me down.

The Kobyashi Maru:

My argument on this point can be easily deflected by saying its an alternate time line…BUT from the conversation in the Genesis Cave in Wrath of Khan, it always seemed to me that while he Cheated, Kirk did it in a sly little way rather than a ridiculously obvious way….I mean, eating an apple-come on! I didn’t buy that. We were lead to believe in Wrath of Khan that he got a commendation for Original Thinking and not hauled before a panel and put on academic suspension.

But again, different time line etc etc

The Destruction of Vulcan and Romulus:

Seriously?? A bat has been taken to the star trek time line here and no strategically placed bridge conversation about a different time line makes a damned difference. I honestly felt that they’d put it right at the end…and they didn’t.

I haven’t a clue if it has divided opinion but in my eyes it’s nothing short of a crock and a disgrace.

Transporting from Delta Vega:

This completely beggars belief. Kirk is on Delta Vega, nearest outpost in 14 kms away. He wanders around, bumps into 2 aliens who try eating him, meets spock and goes to the outpost where they meet scott, have some banter and then beam to enterprise.

I am thinking that Kirk is on Delta Vega for near on 14/16 hours or so… and in This time we can assume Enterprise is at warp speed heading to the rest of the fleet….and somehow they can beam ALL THE WAY to enterprise??? are you kidding me….that was never in the series, never in the 24th century yet, sure there you go-beam away.

if this is the case, voyager could have been back home in less than a year using a shuttlecraft and its transporter. absolutely insane.

Vulcan being about 5 minutes from earth:

Really?????? 5 minutes you say…Enterprise leaves dock, checkov comes on the comm and tells eveyone todays plan, kirk races around and when they reach the bridge-BAM-nearly at Vulcan

On that point:

After the destruction of Vulcan, Im guessing nero heads right for earth, and somehow only reaches it by the time enterprise is ready to approach saturn. how in the hell could it take his ship over 18 hours (rough estimate) to reach earth??

The Universe seems so small:

Adding to those points, all we have is earth, Vulcan and delta vega, all within 5 minutes of each other…it seems very small

The Music:

I pay close attention to music in movies and i am not impressed with the music in this, where it should come in with a bang, it only comes in with a whimper. Compare this to Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock. The Scores are simply in your face.

This is almost apologetic, it seems to slink by in the background and then star trek theme for this is simply awful.

Strangely, the best music in the movie is in the space jump scene, and thats not even on the released CD!

The crew assuming their positions:

Kirk: Just out of the academy, promoted to First officer less than an hour later, assumes command of a starship less than a day later, starfleet gives him their brand new ship

Spock: First officer, quite happy to accept being overlooked for command for a raw cadet

McCoy: Just out of the academy, senior doc killed, bones answers spocks call at sickbay, promoted to chief medical officer

Sulu: The other guy was sick

Scotty: No explanation given…..

REALLY???

and my biggest complaint of all

The Character of Spock:

Not the real Spock, but the ‘New’ Spock.

Judging by what people have already written, there’s a consensus that this new Spock is damned near perfect.

I cannot agree in the slightest. I have always felt that Spock is the best character ever in Star Trek. Superbly written and acted in the 60’s. Leonard Nimoy has this aura around him, and a total command of the character. Completely devoted to logic, unwavering in his beliefs and intent to uphold all the rules and regulations to has sworn to serve.

Yet this movie take a bat to this. I know its a different actor with a different take but i was never convinced of this spock.

The scenes when he’s bullied as a kid are exceptionally well done though and a wonderful nod to the animated’s “Yesteryear” but i didnt buy Quinto as Spock.

That hit home in the scene after Vulcan is destroyed and he’s in the turbolift with Uhura. The dialogue that he says just isnt spock. Its not his character, it just doenst work for me.

But the worst part, was at the end when, while Kirk is offering to help Nero, spock basically tells kirk to let him die.

SERIOUSLY??? let him die….this is spock for god’s sake.

And no, I will not accept the excuse that nero whacked his mother earlier. Anyone who understands the character of spock knows he wouldnt just want petty revenge.

To prove my point, turn on “Journey to Babel” watch the scene in his quarters with his mother, she is desperate for him to turn over command to someone else so he can help save his father. Spock flat out refuses to derelict his duties as starfleet protocol will not allow him.

THAT is spock, THAT is who the man is.

This imposter on the bridge telling kirk to basically kill nero….that aint spock.

And while everything i have written is my opinion, if anyone thinks that spock not willing to join kirk in offering nero help IS spock, then you havent a clue who the character is.

I wont give this film a rating out of 10, 5 or 4 stars. I cant.

I honestly dont know

I advise ANYONE to go see this movie.

While i may not be the biggest fan, i am clearly in the minority so i implore people to go and make up their own minds, chances are that they will like the movie.

It’s not majorly for me though, like i said, up to the destruction of Vulcan i thought it was a good movie.

I honestly thought that like they always do in star trek, they would repair the time line somehow.

But they didnt, and effectively cancelled out the next gen, DS9 and voyager

People will argue that they will still happen, but differently or others will claim its an alternate time line.

Which of course is complete pants. I am higly unimpressed with aspects of this script. But this movie is a success and I am in the minority.

Once again, the majority of this, is MY opinion.

If anyone feels the need to have a go then please do. I wont be reading any responses to this.

So there you have it, go see it though-chances are you’ll enjoy it.

335. Dirk Diggler - May 11, 2009

Good points well made Remington, personally I felt it was “10 quid….down the drain!!!”

My post- no.135 has the same sentiment.

336. captain_neill - May 11, 2009

334-

you make some valid points

Although I loved the film, I see it as an alternative. I still prefer the originals and the new movie is NOT my all time fave movie.

TWOK and First Contact I still prefer

337. Dirk Diggler - May 11, 2009

Also Remington- On the The Kobyashi Maru, you were always left with the impression that it was not widespread knowledge how Kirk had actually defeated the test. It only seemed to be known that he was the only one to defeat it and had got a commendation for same. Saavik in Khan constantly seems to enquire as to how he did it- but if he was hauled up in front of an inquiry as in this movie- surely it would be widely known how Kirk had beaten the test.

Anyway I half expected Kirk to show up to the inquiry, legs crossed, feet up on the table, chewing another apple!

338. Dirk Diggler - May 11, 2009

And of course who designed the test? Spock! Of course! no one else in the Star Trek universe besides the crew of TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT can do anything of note!

Cop out. You were led to believe the Kobeyashi Maru was a time honoured and revered exam by the time kirk got into the academy, not something that was banged out a few months/years before he got there…..

339. Remington Steele - May 11, 2009

Dirk:

Glad you havent torn me apart just yet, but yeah, the Kobyashi Maru thing is an annoyance, here’s some quotes from the Wrath of Khan on it:

KIRK: They destroyed the simulator room and you with it.

SPOCK: The Kobayshi Maru scenario frequently wreaks havoc with students and equipment.
As I recall you took the test three times yourself. Your final solution was, shall we say, unique?

KIRK: It had the virtue of never having been tried.

Fine, Spock knows but no indication that HE set the damned thing….

and of Course:

SAAVIK: On the test, sir, will you tell me what you did? I’d really like to know.

BONES: Lieutenant, you are looking at the only Starfleet cadet who ever beat the no-win scenario

SAAVIK: How?

KIRK: I reprogrammed the simulation so it was possible to rescue the ship.

SAAVIK: WHAT?

KIRK: I changed the conditions of the test. I received a commendation for
original thinking.
(pause)
I don’t like to lose.

Hold up there Jim-you got hauled before about 17,000 thousand cadets and shown up for being a cheat….done in by Spock no less….

Ok, I know, minor point, but it always seemed cool that nobody knew exactly how kirk did it.

Apparently we do now, whilst chewing an apple no less…!

340. rnnstp - May 11, 2009

Ranking? Negative infinity/10.

Spoilers? How can one spoil what is already rotten?

169. Mike: Amen, brother. This movie is just plain stupid in so many ways, and on so many levels. All of the folks heaping all of the underserved praise are either people who don’t understand Star Trek, or they are people who could be sold anything.

Everyone keeps trying to excuse this pile of garbage as the story of how Kirk, Spock, et. al. got together. But that’s just it: this is not “our” Kirk and Spock. “Our” Kirk was forever erased when the timeline was altered beginning just before his birth, and Spock would NEVER have engaged in such a relationship with someone under his command, much less one of his students.

The actors themselves seem to have worked hard to do their best with what they were given to work with from the writers, which was a cheap, incorrect imitation and a flat out fraud. And a starship that looks so much more advanced on the exterior, but looks like an indoor sewage treatment plant on the interior…just stupid and sorry. Paramount can say that canon is whatever they decide it is all they want; this movie is not canon in MY world.

As for reboots, Battlestar Galactica needed one; Star Trek did not. And many BSG fans were highly disappointed at how BSG bit off more than it could chew, and ended up having many episodes that were not much more than extented vamping.

For God’s sakes man! The LOST IN SPACE reboot movie was better than this one, and it was pretty bad!

341. Dirk Diggler - May 11, 2009

Ya, if he had indeed set the test surely Saavik would have questioned SPOCK on the test- the very man who invented it!!

AND surely she would have known Spock had invented/ written not only through common knowledge but after this huge inquiry that publised everything about it.

The question remains though- did the apple receive any commendation?

342. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#341—-There is no dialogue within the film that suggests that Spock invented the KM test, only that he has been in charge of maintaining it for the last few years.

You inferred way too much from that.

343. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#337—-“On the The Kobyashi Maru, you were always left with the impression that it was not widespread knowledge how Kirk had actually defeated the test. It only seemed to be known that he was the only one to defeat it and had got a commendation for same. Saavik in Khan constantly seems to enquire as to how he did it- but if he was hauled up in front of an inquiry as in this movie- surely it would be widely known how Kirk had beaten the test.”

Why would you assume that Kirk Prime behaved precisely as his alternate counterpart did. For all we know, the only part of that which they have in common is the fact that they both reprogrammed the simulator so that it was possible to save the ship.

We do not know that he was “hauled in front of an inquiry” in the original timeline, just as there is no reason to assume that Spock was in charge of the test in that timeline. Spock is the one who brings the charges against Kirk in ST09. If someone else had been assigned to that duty in the original timeline, who is to say that they would have done the same to Kirk Prime?

344. VulcanNonibird - May 11, 2009

@324 Alex – Earth minimal defense

I agree on that but that is not new. Remember “Best of Both Worlds”? Only three – or was it four – tiny quaint ships from mars is all earth defense??? Or “Paradise Lost” form DS9: okay, power is down and there’s only ONE spaceship in orbit???

Star Trek: First Contact was good on this account: Starfleet had a fitting welcome for the Borg-cube. Even if you – again – saw no orbital complexes or defense grid…

I think Earth has:
– at least ONE orbital Starfleet station – later on the huge Spacedock
– orbital shipyards – that Enterpise is built on the surface here – I just count this as a faux pas
– several science stations
– several orbital habitats
– numerous unmanned orbital defense plattforms
– and all this not counting defenses for moon and mars

Why? Earth is the center of a major galactic power!

Plus: All major Federation worlds are as fortified – and what happened to the Vulcan fleet? Was she luckily way off together with the Starfleet? Maybe there are the 10.000 Vulcans who luckily survived.

But thats one trek constant: the Enterprise is always the only vessel around, at least this time there were 7 more – but maybe they were painted the wrong color…..(-;

345. Rich - May 11, 2009

I reluctantly saw the film a 2nd time with different friends. It still sucked. Am I the only one to say it? I am beginning to think this review forum is full of Paramount shills.

I tried being open minded. After all, Star Trek has had its awkward moments throughout. There are some brutally bad TNG, DS9, VOY eps. Plus most of ENT.

My previous comments still stand, but now some specifics (again, I don’t care about continuity due to the alt. timeline):

This film is a comedy– characters speak in catch-phrases, and are essentially cartoon characters. The film follows the live-action comic book trend style of film making. The cgi looks as hoakey to me as the “model ship on string” TOS effects.

The Countdown comic book would have made a better movie.

What was up with the bug in the mouth scene? To have a deliberate Wrath of Khan rip off/homage and then to never come back to it again was pure incompetence.

Launching Kirk to Delta Vega and then having them beam back over vast distances was so far-fetched and unnecessary. Had they invested another $200 in the script those events could have been properly transitioned into the film. Lazy, bad writing…this is the type of thing that people jump all over when it happens in the series episodes.

Nero, another 2D character with a big imposing ship had no impact whatsoever. No backstory, nothing. People complain about Shinzon from Nemesis being a hollow, 2D villian with a big ship that we don’t care about. And they do it again.

Final analysis–all these hard core fans nit-picking continuity and bemoaning the reboot/alternate reality can relax. It doesn’t matter anymore. The franchise has been sold out.

346. ClassicTrek - May 11, 2009

I’m not even going to read other reviews here just yet- want to post my own first. I apologize if I repeat anything that has already been said, but this is my own unfiltered review.

I’m giving this movie 9 out of 10 stars. That’s right, I’m a hardcore TOS fan, was railing against the new ship and bridge and props – but the movie works, the plot explains the changes in the timeline — ALMOST well enough for me and so – 9 out of 10.

So why 9 out of 10 and not 10 out of 10? The writing was great, the characterizations fantastic- but yeah – I’m THAT guy.

Postulating that the arrival of Nero from the future into the past was the moment when the temporal divergence occurred — the first scenes carried what I consider a mistake- Robau, and all members of the Kelvin- wore the arrowhead logo – often called the delta shield — on their uniforms.

The delta shield was established in TOS as the USS Enterprise’s patch/emblem. Other ships had their own unique ship patches – and since these assignment patches are shown on screen from the 60’s show it falls into what I consider “canon”.

Seeing the Kelvin crew wearing an Enterprise emblem didn’t work for me. They should have had their own logo, but the powers that be probably decided to give them an anachronistic delta shield logo to help identify them as Starfleet officers.

They had on the uniforms when Nero showed up, so the logo change wasn’t something that happens after he’s there. The logo was also ALL over Starfleet academy in the movie and so appears to be the Starfleet logo, and not the Enterprise logo.

My understanding is that the Enterprise logo was taken by Starfleet only AFTER the original series (ie- by the time of the first movie everyone wore the delta shield). I’m not sure that was ever put into an official source- and it could have been put into history here, which would have been a fantastic nod and a cool explanation for why the Starfleet logo is that funny little arrowhead.

So it’s a minor detail that probably helped identify the good guys, familiarize non-fans with who was with Starfleet- and only folks like myself might have even bothered to notice. But I did notice.

For me – especially since I have a history in ClassicTrek roleplay- the ship assignment patches are a major part of crew identification and unity. You’re in a starfleet uniform (black pants, appropriate color top) – but then your patch says “I belong to the THIS Crew.” As I said I understand why it was probably done. For me it is a minor textural detail that could have enhanced the movie.

Also startrek.com – the mothership – lists Kirk’s birthplace as “Riverside, Iowa, Earth” so there’s a bit of a conflict here. Again- if the appearance of the Narada in the past spawned the pollution of the time stream- was he born prematurely? If his mother was so pregnant- where they at least on the way to earth, and if so is it plausible that Kirk would have been born in Iowa if they hadn’t been attacked? Could they have at least acknowledged that? Did they I didn’t catch it?

Now- here’s the thing- I need to also add that I’m making the assumption that some of Nero’s technology was recovered by Starfleet from the destruction of the Kelvin and that tech is what inspired the new look and technology of the Enterprise.

That is not implicitly stated in the film, but I need that to be the case for the movie to really work for me.

It’s a thin string – but I’m suspending my disbelief — or at least suspending my disapproval of changing the ship designs — on that assumption.

Really that was about it- everything after the initial divergence is altered and I’m good with that.

Depending on how you look at it the timeline is either relative — which means they traveled along a straight path back to the past which erased the future (which subsequently would likely erase the sequence of events that allowed the movie to exist, which in Back to the Future terms means that Nero would fade out and never come back to the past to create the new timeline -GREAT SCOTT- instant paradox!)

OR they came back and at the moment of temproral divergence an alternate timeline was created – one that runs parallel to the previous time line but that is inescapable in terms of returning from to the other (unless of course your write a nice McGuffin).

347. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#346—“Seeing the Kelvin crew wearing an Enterprise emblem didn’t work for me. They should have had their own logo, but the powers that be probably decided to give them an anachronistic delta shield logo to help identify them as Starfleet officers.

They had on the uniforms when Nero showed up, so the logo change wasn’t something that happens after he’s there. The logo was also ALL over Starfleet academy in the movie and so appears to be the Starfleet logo, and not the Enterprise logo.

My understanding is that the Enterprise logo was taken by Starfleet only AFTER the original series”

Easy to reconcile.

Here goes:

In the original timeline, the USS Kelvin used the Delta logo, and upon her decommissioning, it was passed along to the Enterprise. However, in the altered timeline, and due to the heroism of the Kelvin’s crew (and in particular, that of her captain and first officer) Starfleet adopted the logo as universal as a tribute of sorts. After all, if they can make USS Kelvin salt-shakers and erect “Riverside Shipyards” in honor of George Kirk—-why not?

We—as fans—have been creating such “fanon” to explain away preceived inconsistencies for decades. Why stop now?

This one was particularly easy.

348. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#346—-But I agree with the 9/10 rating. The ascension of Kirk to the captaincy was still a stretch, even though by that point in the film—-I was actually rooting for it to happen.

349. ClassicTrek - May 11, 2009

Closettrekker – excellent points

350. Orb of the Emissary - May 11, 2009

Ok, first of- the movie was AWESOME! It exceeded this Trekkie’s expectations. And let me just say that they were high to begin with. Yes, I was one of those fans proclaiming “Canon must be respected!” and that the bridge was more like an “iBridge” and “How can they re-design my beloved Enterprise?!”. But knowing *SPOILER* that our reality’s Spock was in it *END SPOILER* eased the transition from my Trek to the new Trek. In the end, I easily overlooked the many changes this movie brings to the Trek lore, although I’m still processing the major changes *SPOILER* like the fall of Vulcan and Romulus *END SPOILER*, but I think I will soon “adapt”. Like Quark said at the end of DS9’s finale, “The more things change, the more they stay the same.”.

351. Mark - May 11, 2009

Everyone has covered much of the detail, so I won’t go into lots of exposition. Overall, I liked it. There were a couple things that I didn’t like, but the good stuff overcame it. I’ve never been an incredible nitpicker with regard to canon, and I think that has helped me to enjoy it more. I am also a Sherlockian, and the Sherlock Holmes community is also rife with canon this and canon that, and Conan Doyle was even more negligent about continuity. (I liked the Sherlock Holmes quote in this one, even if it’s been used in Trek before.)

Kudos to the cast, I was pleased with all. It’s fast paced, interesting and fun. Perhaps since I am in the military I’m just used to pressing the “I Believe” button with fewer questions than some.

But the biggest reward from this movie is that my non-trekker wife truly enjoyed it, gave it an 8 out of 10. She says she’ll start watching my Star Trek DVDs with me now. I hope she means it, and I hope she won’t get bored by the slower pace.

What didn’t I like –

Engineering – Way too industrial. Since the Enterprise timeline is still intact, doesn’t make sense that the relatively advanced and clean engineering plant from NX-01 would morph into a reject from a water purification plant. This impression was not changed in any way by Scotty’s reference to dilithium crystals.

Kirk’s promotion – I am a graduate of the Naval Academy, and now 20 years on am still only a Commander (for those not familiar, still one step down from Captain). Even though Kirk Prime was the youngest captain in the history of Starfleet, for him to go from cadet to Captain in one fell swoop is just a kick in the balls. I think it would have made more sense for him to go off to his first duty as an ensign, or maybe a lieutenant. Then for the 2nd movie, we jump forward several years to when he has truly earned command, and he selects his command crew based on this first adventure.

Bottom Line: JJ and Co. did what they had to do to revive the franchise, taking some liberties along the way. It will not diminish my enjoyment of my DVDs of what has come before, nor will it prevent me from enjoying the inevitable sequels. It was either this movie and the ones that will certainly follow, or no more Star Trek on the big screen. Better an alternate timeline than an expired original timeline. I enjoyed it, I’ll buy the Blu-Ray, and I’ll patiently wait for the next one.

352. Admiral Quinn - May 11, 2009

THANKS JJ AND TEAM! After sifting through these posts I thought I should take a moment and thank you for not catering to bloviating nitpickers. I agree with Leonard Nimoy that this is a fantastic movie. I am relieved that you followed Spocks axiom…”the needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few… or the one”. Well, again, thankyou for 2 hours (actually 4 since I’ve seen it twice) of pure enjoyment!

353. Agent 194 - May 11, 2009

I cannot fault the cast of the movie, especially Urban and Pine. I enjoyed it, and I’m sure it will be very popular with the general public. However. the script was absolutely ridiculous. A series of convenient accidents contrive to get the Starfleet cadets into the positions of the command crew of the fleet’s new flagship. So essentially by the end of the movie the Enterprise is run not by the best experienced crew in starfleet, but a bunch of promising rookies (With the exception of Spock). Kirk runs into old Spock purely by chance on Delta Vega which is now apparently a moon of Vulcan. All this is lazy writing. A lot of the humour in the movie seemed to be there to hide the obvious plot contrivances. I now understand what they meant by it not being your Dad’s Trek. I’m afraid intelligent thought provoking stories with a moral or political message based in scientific realism have been replaced by fast paced action and obvious humour for the MTV generation. This is dumbed-down Trek for the lowest common denominator. I am sure it will be a great success, but long term fans I feel will desert this generation of Kirk and co if the scripts do not improve and without the fans to support it Trek will die. It is we the fans who have kept Trek alive all these years for Paramount to rake in the dough, no one else. Thank God for the likes of James Cawley’s Phase II and “Of Gods and Men” the true successors of Roddenberry’s original series.

354. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#345—-“I am beginning to think this review forum is full of Paramount shills.”

I suppose that 222 of the 233 critics cited on Rotten Tomatoes are also “Paramount shills”.

Give me a break.

The film has been well-received all around. You are entitled to your own opinion, and there is nothing wrong with being in the minority, but to suggest that the rest of us (the majority) have some motivation beyond genuinely liking the film is wrong and insulting.

Get a life.

355. Billy Bobby - May 11, 2009

326

Star Trek 5 is suddenly a very very VERY GOOD Star Trek film.

I couldn’t agree with you more. I remember leaving the theater after watching Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Numb, err, Crystal Skull. and asking my brother, “Which is worse, The Temple of Doom or the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull?” After letting the film digest for 5 minutes, I came to the conclusion that it was worse than the Temple of Doom. I couldn’t believe The Temple of Doom had been surpassed.

It took me a couple of hours to digest this movie. Star Trek 2009 is awful. At least Star Trek 5 was recognizably Star Trek. Even though the effects sucked and it suffered from a horrible ending, at least there was great Kirk-Spock-McCoy interaction. This movie has none of that. McCoy was great but he had few lines.

345

Final analysis–all these hard core fans nit-picking continuity and bemoaning the reboot/alternate reality can relax. It doesn’t matter anymore. The franchise has been sold out.

True to that.

Here’s a look at better movies of TOS only (IMO).

1) The Wrath of Khan
2) The Search for Spock
3) The Voyage Home
4) The Motion Picture

1979-1986 “The Golden Years of Star Trek” They should have stopped after The Voyage Home with the new Enterprise setting out on its continuing mission.

5) The Undiscovered Country

Little drop off

6) The FInal Frontier

Big drop off

7) Star Trek

356. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#351—“Even though Kirk Prime was the youngest captain in the history of Starfleet, for him to go from cadet to Captain in one fell swoop is just a kick in the balls. I think it would have made more sense for him to go off to his first duty as an ensign, or maybe a lieutenant. Then for the 2nd movie, we jump forward several years to when he has truly earned command, and he selects his command crew based on this first adventure.”

As a former Marine officer, I agree with that. I thought the problem could easily have been solved by jumping forward in time again in between the KM test and Kirk’s eventual boarding of the Enterprise. I didn’t feel there was any need to face Nero in 2258. It could have been done several years later, eliminating the “cadet to captain” bit.

But I have to say that this was really the only issue I had with the film, and it is entirely forgivable.

As much as I question Pike’s decision to pass over every commissioned officer aboard for the position of First officer in his absence, it is certainly no worse to me than the notion that Captain Kirk, Captain Spock, Captain Scott, and Commanders Sulu, Chekov, and Uhura are all assigned to the same ship (NCC-1701A) in The Great Trek Turd Of ’89.

357. RetroWarbird - May 11, 2009

345 – Amazing how inconsistent the Transporters are … that Chekov can’t even beam up Spock’s mother from Vulcan from orbit … but Scotty can Transwarp Beam himself and Kirk halfway across a Star System onto a ship going Warp 4.

I mean … Spock knew the formula for Transwarp Beaming … but who even knows when Scotty figured it out in True Universe … probably after his extended absence trapped inside a stasis field made out of a Transporter and after he’d been given access to 24th Century technology and hung out with O’Brien and Geordi back at Starfleet HQ …

Kind of makes me wonder if several novels are now canon … like Crossover, where Scotty stole the Yorktown and rescued Spock from a Romulan prison.

Also kind of defeats the entire purpose of Warp Drive … even with the argument that the Enterprise wasn’t as far away as the movie made it seem.

358. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#355—“1979-1986 “The Golden Years of Star Trek” They should have stopped after The Voyage Home with the new Enterprise setting out on its continuing mission.”

That might be the only portion of your analysis with which I agree, up to the point where the original characters are recast (something I wished had happened as soon as I saw TFF).

” ‘Star Trek 5 is suddenly a very very VERY GOOD Star Trek film.’

I couldn’t agree with you more.”

I have to question the sanity of both of you.

359. Nagilum! - May 11, 2009

So, after all the waiting, I finally saw “Star Trek” on Friday. And to my surprise, my brief review would be: “Meh”.

It wasn’t a horrible movie, but I don’t see why it has been getting such rave reviews. In my opinion it was just a decent action movie, and not in any way as interesting as the Star Trek franchise at it’s best (which, IMO, has always been on TV).

Mostly, I am going to focus my review on premise, plot, character and theme, as those are really what I care about in entertainment. As for the visual elements-the CGI, the costumes, the camera work, the action scenes, etc…I really don’t care; I thought most of it was pretty good looking but not outstanding. The only thing that bothered me visually was the interiors of the Enterprise, especially the bridge-but if I’d like the story, etc., I could live with it.

But I didn’t like the story. Let’s start with the basic premise. It’s a reboot, but based on the premise that we’re in an alternate universe because Nero traveled back in time and blew up the USS Kelvin.

I don’t mind that it’s a reboot-the Star Trek universe had become kind of convoluted after the four spin-offs and the TNG movies. After “Enterprise” was canceled, if you had asked me what to do with “Star Trek” I would have said nothing for a decade or so, and then bring it back on TV with new behind the scenes folks, and either make a TOS reboot or a new series set a century or so after the TNG-era. I don’t understand people who get so upset about reboots or remakes-after all, the original material is still available in DVDs, reruns, etc.

But why explain the reboot on screen via time travel and alternate timelines? Maybe because it’s “Star Trek” and people accept that stuff in “Star Trek”. Maybe so there wouldn’t be a revolt of the fans. Maybe so they could work Leonard Nimoy in. Whatever. I was skeptical of this idea when I first heard of it, and the finished product didn’t make me feel better about. It just seems like trying to have your cake and eat it to: say that it’s tied to the original story yet have a reason to change the stuff you don’t like. And frankly, as someone who likes parallel universe stories and alternate history, I don’t really think this new universe is that plausible as an alternate history of the original Trek universe. I mean, the Kelvin is destroyed so the Enterprise is built in Iowa and Spock and Uhura are a couple and Kirk becomes a captain straight out of the Academy. I don’t buy it. I think I would have enjoyed it more if they’d just said “We are doing a reboot, hope you like it”, rather than trying to explain the changes away.

The desire to make it an alternate universe led to, what I found to be, a less than compelling plot. I’d read a summary of the Countdown comics, and if I hadn’t would I be able to follow the plot? I can’t say. Even though I did, I didn’t care about it. I mean, “Crazy Romulan from the future has a vendetta against Spock so he wants to blow up Vulcan and Earth?” Honestly, as a plot I think that’s about as good a plot as “Nemesis” (“Crazy Romulan made Picard-clone wants to destroy…something”.)

Of course, Nero and his plans weren’t the real focus of the film, it was about Kirk and co. becoming the crew/family we were used to. Okay, but I don’t think this story was that well told either. I think that the characters were made to be a lot closer in age than I’d thought of them. Like many others, I didn’t buy the “cadets to senior officers of the new Federation flagship” thing. I could have bought the Kirk/Spock conflict…until the scene where Spock shoots Kirk out of the ship in an escape pod. What the heck?! Why wouldn’t Spock put him in the brig? Why would the rest of the crew let Spock jettison a cadet-even if it was a disgraced, obnoxious stowaway cadet?

Ah, but that scene wasn’t motivated by logic, or even anything resembling reality. It was motivated by plot. Kirk had to be shot out so he could wind up in the same place as old Spock. And close to Scotty, too. On a thing (planet? Moon?) that shares a name with a location from “Where No Man Has Gone Before” but is apparently located in the Vulcan system rather than at the edge of the galaxy.

Really, that’s where the movie lost me. Joyriding little kid Kirk, acceptable. Spock/Uhura, okay. Destruction of Vulcan, a risky twist that might have moved me if I had’t been spoiled to it earlier that day. But then they shoot Kirk out in that escape pod. And suddenly it becomes one of the most crazy-coincidence driven movies I’ve ever seen.

So, given the rather uninteresting and convoluted villain plot, the unrealistic character development, and the crazy coincidence driven plot, I really think that even if I wasn’t a Trek fan and was just looking for an action movie with a decent plot, I would only find “Star Trek” to be decent, not great.

But I am a Trek fan. I remember the first episode I ever saw: “Conundrum” from the fifth season of TNG, when I was ten years old. I proudly (okay, occasionally more self-deprecatingly) list TOS, TNG and DS9 among my ten favorite TV shows, and I list “The Voyage Home” as one of my favorite movies. And I like Trek not because of special effects or action but because I like how, at its best, it used an interesting science fiction universe to tell stories that commented on the human condition. Even Voyager and Enterprise, which I generally didn’t think were of the highest quality, did that at their best. This movie didn’t. And worse, I don’t even think it tried.

I read interviews with the writers, as well as reviews from both fans and non-fans, that stated that this film was trying to bring Gene Roddenberry’s optimistic vision into the 21st century. But does it? I suppose if that merely means that it shows a future where Earth has survived and people of all races and both genders are working together to explore space, then yes, it does. But really, I think that’s just the bare bones. That’s like saying that a movie captures the spirit of Batman because it features a millionaire named Bruce Wayne who fights crime in Gotham City dressed as Batman. It’s really just a summary of the basic premise that would apply equally to the Adam West TV show and to “Batman Begins”.

I know Gene Roddenberry wasn’t a philosopher who wrote numerous tomes intricately detailing his vision of the future. Like Rod Serling before him, he was a screenwriter who used science fiction as a vehicle to comment on social issues and the human condition. Some of Roddenberry’s ideas weren’t good or realistic, and he was inconsistent. But I admire him, and others who worked on Trek, for trying. Trying to say something. Trying to make people think. Yes, “The Voyage Home” is not subtle in its “save the whales” message. But it’s trying to make people think about that message (which I think is a good one) while also being a very fun movie-in my opinion, that’s the best of both worlds.

This movie didn’t make me think about, well, anything, really. I suppose there is some element of the age old emotion vs. logic argument with Spock’s struggle, or that we can think about nature vs. nurture regarding Kirk’s destiny to command the Enterprise regardless of the changes in the timeline. But honestly, I think that’s a bit of a stretch.

It’s interesting, because when I hear people talk about how this movie’s supposed optimism is different from other recent sci-fi movies/TV shows, I think that two of the series people may be comparing it to are “Firefly”/”Serenity” and the new “Battlestar Galactica”. Yet despite the fact that both of those are darker than the new Trek, both in terms of premise and style, I think that they are actually closer to Trek at its best in terms of asking questions about the human condition.

So, its seems like the Trek franchise is not dead. I guess that’s a good thing, but I don’t really care. Because I’ve never really thought the survival of the franchise mattered that much. After all, many of my other favorite movies and TV shows won’t/don’t have sequels, spin-offs, reunions, remakes, or reboots-and I’m fine with that, because I can always watch the stuff I enjoy on DVD, in reruns or online. Case in point, the day I saw the new “Star Trek” movie I came home and, at midnight, I noticed that WGN was showing “Star Trek: The Next Generation”. The episode was “The Emissary”, a good, but not great episode. I still enjoyed it a lot more than the new movie. And it reminded me that whenever I want to revisit the parts of the Trek universe that I love, I can always do so. And I find that much more exciting than the idea that J.J. Abrams is probably going to make a sequel to the new movie.

The bottom line: I’d give the movie a 7 out of 10. Visually impressive, decently acted, but with a poor plot, it’s at best a decent action movie. And it really lacks any kind of deeper meaning that I think represents Star Trek at its best.

360. Billy Bobby - May 11, 2009

Star Trek 5 was a turd. But The Final Frontier is like Pizza, even though it was bad it was still good. I would rather watch The Final Frontier 1,000,000 before watching Star Trek 2009 again.

361. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#357—-“Amazing how inconsistent the Transporters are … that Chekov can’t even beam up Spock’s mother from Vulcan from orbit … but Scotty can Transwarp Beam himself and Kirk halfway across a Star System onto a ship going Warp 4.”

You cannot even compare the two scenarios on equal ground. I don’t see the inconsistency.

Chekov is not aware of the knowledge Scotty has been provided from the future, but in any case, I fail to see how that formula would have been any help in retrieving Amanda at all. The rest of the party was standing on relatively solid ground. She fell before her pattern could be properly stored in the transporter beam.

How is it inconsistent?

362. Billy Bobby - May 11, 2009

361

I agree with Closettrekker on the point he made. However, 357 should have mentioned how Chekov was able to beam up Kirk/Sulu while falling incredibly fast but couldn’t lock onto Spock’s falling mom.

This movie is so ridiculous it makes the Great Barrier in ST V look like it makes sense.

363. sean - May 11, 2009

#344

Exactly. Earth is FREQUENTLY left undefended in Star Trek. Yes, it’s silly. But it’s also a well-established Trek tradition! :)

#357

Amanda switched positions due to the surface of Vulcan being sucked into a black hole. I don’t see how the two situations mentioned are even slightly similar. It also occurs prior to Spock giving Scotty the formula, so no inconsistencies there.

364. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#360—“The Final Frontier is like Pizza, even though it was bad it was still good. I would rather watch The Final Frontier 1,000,000 before watching Star Trek 2009 again.”

I’m shuddering at the thought….the horror….the horror…the horror….

I loved ST09.

Prior to Friday, I had seen three ST films that I would consider to be wonderful, and the rest ranged from okay to just plain bad. I think that ST09 is in that category of wonderful ST films for me, along with TMP, TWOK, and TVH.

All 4 of them couldn’t be any more different in tone and style, but each brings something wonderful to the table for me. I’ll be watching this one again and again.

It isn’t perfect, but if it were, a potential sequel would have nowhere to go but down. The last twenty years or so of Trek have been boring to me. Bland characters, tired formulaic storytelling, and pure crap at the box office. Trek had become a “geeks only club”.

Star Trek is fun again. It’s romantic, humorous, sexy, adventurous, and unafraid of a good old-fashioned fistfight.

I’m sorry you didn’t like it. But I’ve been waiting twenty years for this.

365. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#362—“357 should have mentioned how Chekov was able to beam up Kirk/Sulu while falling incredibly fast but couldn’t lock onto Spock’s falling mom.”

I have only seen it once so far, but I don’t recall the story precluding there being a difference there too.

For one thing, consider how long it actually *did* take for Chekov to get a lock on Sulu and Kirk. Amanda simply didn’t have as far to fall before she would have been killed. There wasn’t as much time for him to make adjustments (and still safely beam the others aboard).

Once again, there is no inconsistency there.

366. Captain Wes Huntley - May 11, 2009

I have to say this… but J.J. Abrams has probably made the greatest Star Trek film ever. It even surpasses the Wrath of Khan in my book of the greatest Star Trek movies. I love them all except for Nemesis, and I just like The Final Frontier. Nemesis, for me, was basically the TNG-era version of Star Trek II. But this movie, when it was first announced way back in April 2006, I was like “Whaaaa? Paramount is doing another one?” Honestly, this announcement really made my jaw drop. But when I first saw the first teaser trailer (the welding one) I was very happy that the movie would go back to its roots, yet modernized for the 21st century as most of the technology we have today seems to have been influenced by the Original Series.

Anyway, this movie really blew away all my expectations. This was definitely worth the three years’ wait by fans, whom most were concerned about the new Kirk and Spock. But the cast was solid, except for probably Richard Robau (Faran Tahir), whom only had a couple of scenes and I don’t think he was that “heroic Federation captain” that the writers Alex Kurtzman and Robert Orci had envisioned. But if he was heroic, then where was it? Was he heroic in telling Nero in what gave him the right to attack the Kelvin? I didn’t see it and I probably will have to go see it again in order to understand. That’s the problem with big action movies, you miss little things and you have to go back and see the movie again in order to catch them. All in all, this movie is worth the money. It was so good I wish the movie was out on DVD already as I would be the first in line to purchase it.

The movie made homages to the original series, such as when Pike or Kirk would touch a button on the captain’s chair, it would make a noise familiar to the original Bridge. The visual effects were awesome. Too bad the sound effects for the phasers and photon torpedoes didn’t sound the originals but it’s ok. Overall, I give this film a 10 out of 10. If the sequel comes out in 2011 (which would celebrate the franchise’s 45th anniversary) I would be the one of the first in line to see it as this film leaves the door open for the next one.

367. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#366—” J.J. Abrams has probably made the greatest Star Trek film ever. It even surpasses the Wrath of Khan in my book of the greatest Star Trek movies.”

Agreed, and that is not a slight to Nick Meyer’s 1982 classic.

TWOK is still (IMO) perhaps the greatest B-Movie of all time, but ST09 surpasses it as a Star Trek film.

My only compaints are the unnecessary rapid ascension of Kirk to the captaincy and the reduction of McCoy to more of a secondary character who has a moment or two, but really no more consideration than the actual secondary characters of Trek—-Sulu, Chekov, Uhura, and Scotty.

I do hope that the sequel focuses more on “The Big Three” than just Kirk and Spock. None of them are as entertaining without the other two.

368. Doug L. - May 11, 2009

I think most people liked this movie despite it’s numerous questionable decisions. you can see my critiques summed up in posts 128 & 140

The important thing is JJ Abrams has succesfully relaunched Trek, that means there will be more.

What confounds me is that despite bringing an enormous talent in cast and crew, a big budget, and his own innate sense of character and pace.., somehow we wound up with a movie light on character development, that bounces around too much, and never allows you
to soak up the “gravity” of a situation.

The Film under uses and poorly relates the villian’s motivation and effectively wastes Bana in what should have been one of the coolest Trek Villians of all time.

The best of this movie may have wound up on the edit room floor.

I don’t require this to be “my father’s Star Trek”, but as I expect with any movie, (and I’m a harsh critic), I expect, solid character moments, with development and motivation. The presentation of these elements was this movies weakness. However, with a good cast in place, I trust JJ will have a better handle on the next one.

Doug L.

369. Billy Bobby - May 11, 2009

365

For one thing, consider how long it actually *did* take for Chekov to get a lock on Sulu and Kirk. Amanda simply didn’t have as far to fall before she would have been killed. There wasn’t as much time for him to make adjustments (and still safely beam the others aboard).

Kirk and Sulu were falling hundreds, if not thousands of feet per second. Little old Amanda fell off half way during beaming, hardly enough time to be falling thousands of feet per second. I guess Chekov isn’t the hot shit after all.

364

It isn’t perfect, but if it were, a potential sequel would have nowhere to go but down. The last twenty years or so of Trek have been boring to me. Bland characters, tired formulaic storytelling, and pure crap at the box office. Trek had become a “geeks only club”.

I agree. The sequel is going to suck complete ass. The sequel won’t have the luxury of having a decent 30 min. beginning. I wish a black hole caused by Red Matter could suck this movie and its sequel into non-existence. You are right when you mention that the past 20 years of Star Trek has been bad. Like I said, Star Trek should have called it quits in 1986 (20th anniversary).

IMHO, I still think 1989 is infinitely better than 2009. 2009 had better graphics but at least 1989 had its heart in the right place.

370. Billy Bobby - May 11, 2009

367

TWOK is still (IMO) perhaps the greatest B-Movie of all time, but ST09 surpasses it as a Star Trek film.

Captain Esteban: Oh my God!

371. Starscreamsrevenge - May 11, 2009

Hi everyone, here is my opinion on the new trekkie film. Well can I say that JJ has finally messed things up? Empty story line, empty actors, and an empty picture house when I went.
There are so many things in this film that completely miss the whole Star Trek ethic.
Star Trek is not about flash bang wallop, it is about putting over ideas to challenge what we think about the world we live in today, not creating an all action hero with a trusty side kick. The relationship between Kirk and Spock or Spock and Kirk was always equal and balanced with never a feeling that Kirk is the alpha male and Spock is a hapless doughy eyed child.
As mentioned in previous entries the out of phase time lines and confusing historical facts are big enough to fly the enterprise through. The one I like is when Kirk tells Pike that he will graduate in three years to prove what a big man he is and it would seam that all the personnel on that shuttle must be the calibre of Kirk as they are all at the same stage as Kirk. I wonder did JJ actually watch an episode of any of the story lines fron Star Trek to grasp what Star Trek is about, or did he approach the film like his other soulless franchise `Lost` or should it be `Lost it ` and thought he could write it as it went along.
It also made me smile to my self when it was evident that the time line had been changed, the point was made so strongly I dont know why the cast did not stop at this point to turn to the camera and wave their fingers to everyone to make sure we uderstood that they can now do what ever they want to with the franchise to avoid having to bring any other aged original cast member back. I dont know what the real story was to why Shatner was not included, but he will feel better for not being part of it. I know the film will do well but in one years time, it will be a distant memory and the well oiled machine will be preparing us for the sequal. They might even let Johnny Frakes direct it as this film is closer to Thunderbirds than the Wrath of Khan.

372. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#369—-TFF isn’t even infinitely better than “Ishtar”.

It isn’t a surprise to me that some trek fans do not like this movie. Two Star Trek fans can rarely even agree upon anything more than the notion that they enjoy Star Trek in one incarnation or another. So, no big deal.

I can only speak for myself, but:
1. ST09-wonderful
2. TWOK-wonderful
3. TMP-wonderful
4. TVH-wonderful
(huge gap)
5. TUC-pretty decent
6. TSFS-pretty decent
(another big gap)
7. FC-best of a bad film series
(another huge gap)
8. INS-bad
9a. GEN-awful
9b. NEM-awful
9c. TFF (aka TGTTO89)-awful

373. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#369—-He also wasn’t just locking on to her, but beaming aboard the rest of them as well. I think you are being a bit too hard on the Beaver, and really reaching for inconsistency on the transporters (as if transporter tech isn’t a ridiculous notion in the first place).

374. sean - May 11, 2009

#369

Amanda was falling into the core of Vulcan which was being consumed by a BLACK HOLE. Not even remotely the same situation. You’re making an inconsistency where there isn’t one.

375. sean - May 11, 2009

Whoops, I just saw we aren’t supposed to include major spoilers here. Sorry Anthony, I didn’t see that!

376. RetroWarbird - May 11, 2009

362 – I was totally about to say that.

I realize it’s an easy enough thing to explain away … however … they didn’t explain it away! My one main problem with the new movie isn’t really the derivation from canon … that’s fine … it’s just how JJ Abrams hyper, frantic action movie roller-coastering didn’t allow for ANY expository discussions about why things were happening. Spock’s mom dies in a transporter malfunction … we get no explanation for why Transporters work like frigging miracle machines most of the time but not that time (although any Trekkie worth his salt can fill in the blanks). Then the only time we really get to reflect on it are in brief, since “they have no time” … Spock going down a turbolift and Uhura consoling him. Spock ready to beam out and getting a tiny pep talk from his father.

It takes a while to get from Vulcan to Earth … and Spock is notorious for going back to his quarters and meditating … yeah, this is younger, more reckless, less logical Spock … but it would’ve felt normal to me.

No big deal though.

The alternate reality stuff really doesn’t bother me. I’ve been making “Yesterday’s Enterprise” comparisons all day.

Meanwhile …

I see a TON of Nemesis bashing! I’m not going to dispute that it’s the worst Star Trek movie ever … but man, I don’t hate it nearly as vehemently as a lot of you do … Stuart Baird? Yeah I hate him. Horrible director, and I think Frakes could have salvaged it.

But I thought there was at least enough good things in Nemesis as there were downright horrible plots and hammy villains. New Romulan Warbirds … Remans were actually cool as hell … all of the TNG cast might’ve been trapped inside a lame plot and cheesy Riker/Troi marriages but at least they were up to their usual standards of thoughtfulness and there was zero deviation from character. And I actually love the moral ambiguity of Data killing himself, but sacrificing his own brother so that he could come back. Android Ethics! Plus that scene with the Argo was pretty stellar.

377. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#370—-Why is it easier for you to buy this:

(A) that of all the people who could have beamed down to Ceti Alpha V, one of them had to be a former member of the Enterprise crew;

(B) or that Khan happens to escape exile and gain control of the USS Reliant at the same time that the very man he wishes to exact revenge upon (who has been bound to a desk job by the way) happens to board “the only ship in the quadrant” with all of the major characters from TOS (who all happen to be participating in the training mission);

(C) or that the creators of the Genesis device happen to be the former lover and illegitimate son of Jim Kirk;

(D) or that (without explanation, btw) the Enterprise cannot set the transporter on “maximum dispersion” and beam the armed Genesis device as far away as possible to render it harmless (as it did with Nomad in “The Changeling”)?

Both films are alot of fun, yet both suffer from certain all-too-convenient sequences of events in the plot.

I fail to see the difference.

378. RetroWarbird - May 11, 2009

373 …

Warp Drive creates a Warp Field, bending subspace around a Starship, basically creating a synthetic wormhole for it to travel faster than light speed through.

According to Sci-Fi 101, a black hole is a gravity sink that presumably has an opening on one side, a wormhole, and an exit on the other. They are similar phenomenon before you even get into the power variance between an artificial subspace lane created by Matter/Anti-Matter Collision and an artificial subspace vortex created by “Red Matter”, whatever the hell that’s supposed to be.

So granted, maybe it’s easier to beam somebody INTO the gravimetric distortions of a wormhole-like subspace structure onto a moving ship than it would be to beam somebody off of a planet in the midst of a gravity well also moving … but really … it’s a non-point at this point.

I’m not knocking the movie’s use of characters at all … I’ll defend that forever. I just can’t wrap my head around Deus Ex Machinas that aren’t always Deus Ex Machinas …

379. JTK1999 - May 11, 2009

This is the most difficult movie review I have ever written. Seriously, where do I even begin? Everyone that knows me is well aware that I love Star Trek better than life itself. I have loved its characters, trappings, stories, and internal philosophy since I was six years old. Hell, when I was in the second grade my mom took me to Disney World. When we got to the hotel, I turned on the TV and insisted on finishing “City on the Edge of Forever” before we went to the park. So where do I begin a discussion of a movie that recasts the iconic roles of TOS and attempts to restart the franchise in the same way TNG did in 1987?

It’s a daunting task because the producers and Internet reviewers have set up a scenario on which the movie is beyond criticism. If you don’t simply accept everything the film presents then you are branded a “nit-picker” who can’t see past his strict adherence to canon. In this review, however, I will attempt to argue that this film fails as Star Trek in several significant ways that are not “nit-picks.”

First let’s get a basic overview of the plot. The film starts out with an attack
on the U.S.S. Kelvin by a ship that we have never seen before. The ship is
commanded by a Romulan named Nero who demands to know the location of Ambassador Spock. It becomes clear that he is from the post-Nemesis 24th century when he demands the stardate after the captain of the Kelvin has no knowledge of Spock. In his rage, Nero then destroys the Kelvin. The first officer of the Kelvin is George Kirk. His pregnant wife is also on-board carrying James T. Kirk. George’s wife survives on a shuttle but he dies attempting to destroy Nero’s ship. In that instant a new Star Trek universe is created in which the events of the universe and lives of the characters take a different path than what we have seen in the previous five series and ten movies. Basically, Nero blames Spock
and the Vulcans for the destruction of Romulus so he wants to destroy Vulcan and make Spock witness it. The rest of the movie relies on a series of unlikely coincidences and cheats to assemble the TOS crew onto the Enterprise. The timeline is never repaired and this new universe is now free to develop its own stories.

Before I get to the bad, let’s mention the good. Karl Urban is spooky as McCoy. He is the closest thing you will ever see to DeForrest Kelley coming back to life. He nails the role in a way that no other member of the cast does. He IS Leonard McCoy in this movie. I cannot praise him enough for giving fans an almost transcendent experience with his performance.

Now, what was my major problem with the movie? It did not adhere to the most basic philosophical concept that Gene Roddenberry infused into Star Trek. Not only did it not adhere to it, it went in the opposite direction. The idea that man is capable of improving himself through his own effort free of both gods and fate is intrinsic to what Star Trek is all about. The fact that Star Trek has a secular humanist philosophy is not something hidden nor is it something I am reading into it. In fact, it is so obviously there that many times modern Trek came across as too preachy. Simply take a look at TOS episodes like The Apple, Who Mourns for Adonis?, and Return of the Archons as classic examples of Gene’s worldview. The most cursory study of the creation of Star Trek will show you that it was created as an outlet for this particular philosophy. And until this movie, that philosophy has been maintained through every incarnation of Trek.

So what is so different about this movie? It’s whole premise is based on the idea of fatalism. Even though Nero alters the past and creates a new timeline, the TOS bridge crew still manages to wind up together in their respective positions. Kirk gets banished to an ice planet and monsters just so happen to chase him into a cave where older Spock is waiting. Then, the two of them walk to the nearest outpost where Scotty just so happens to be working. Kirk doesn’t become the captain of the Enterprise because he went to school, worked hard, cheated when he had to, and exemplified himself as a crewmember on other ships. No, he becomes captain because “it’s his destiny” to do so. This view of the universe plays into the nauseating phrase “everything happens for a reason.” I’m sorry, that is NOT what Star Trek is all about. The only reason anything happens
is because people take actions.

The characters on Star Trek are not mythological archetypes. They have always been portrayed as real people who think, feel, love, hate, grow, and learn as their lives progress. In The Wrath of Khan, Spock tells Admiral Kirk that commanding a starship is his first, best destiny. He reminds him of this because Kirk had chosen to accept promotion to admiral. It was a mistake for him to accept the promotion because the best destiny for Kirk to follow, through his life choices, is to captain a starship. There is no force outside of human action that decides his destiny. J.J. Abrams and his writers deny the metaphysical free will that real humans posses. In the process, they cheapen the characters by making them something they are not, archetypes. An accurate way to
describe this movie would be to call it George Lucas’ Star Trek. It certainly
isn’t Gene Roddenberry’s.

Aside from this fundamental shift in philosophy, my other issue is the total lack of meaning in the story. Roddenberry created his “Wagon Train to the Stars” in order to explore the human condition. The use of the conventions of science fiction allowed him to comment on both the issues of the day as well as the issues that man has dealt with for his entire existence. This film deals with nothing. It is about nothing. You could argue that it is essentially a glorified TV pilot that is only trying to put its pieces onto the board but that mentality sells good writers short. Re-watch the TOS pilot The Cage, the TNG pilot Encounter at Farpoint, and the DS9 pilot Emissary and you will see excellent examples of how to establish new characters, new settings, and a stage for new adventures BUT still be about something. The best analogy I can make about this
new Trek movie is to say Star Trek (2009) is to Star Trek TOS as Planet of the Apes (2001) is to Planet of the Apes (1968). It essentially takes the names and characters, removes the meaning and subtext, and makes a mindless adventure movie. We’ve come a long way from when NBC told Gene that The Cage was “too cerebral.”

Compared to the previously mentioned issues, my other complaints are mainly ones of aesthetics. I don’t really care to see Kirk as a boy drive a corvette while blasting the Beastie Boys. I don’t see the point of creating a romantic relationship between Spock and Uhura. I didn’t care for the silly, over-the-top Orci/Kurtzman humor. Those are issues that I could have more easily forgiven if the story had been true to the nature of Star Trek. But, lacking the fundamentals, it made the superficial problems all that more obvious.

I realize that this film was not made for me. It was made for a younger audience that didn’t grow up with Star Trek. Believe me, I am all in favor of making a Star Trek that appeals to younger people but not necessarily me. But without the philosophy and the moral core, why do I want to pass Trek on to them? It was always the philosophy of Star Trek that gave me hope. At school each day I was told fundamentalist Christian doomsday scenarios about the “rapture”, the “anti-Christ” and about how God was going to destroy the world soon. This is not what you want to hear as a child! You don’t want or need adults telling you that you may never get to grow up because of their religious fantasies. What saved me mentally was what I was shown on Star Trek. It showed me a world where the
future was better than the present, where man had improved himself through his own hard work, and a way of thinking that liberated my mind from militant, fundamentalist religion. It inspired me to learn, study, and most of all to dream or a better tomorrow. That is the gift that Star Trek has to give young people. If it can’t give them that and is just yet another piece of mindless entertainment, then Gene’s mission has failed.

The best thing that can come out of this movie is that young people are inspired to go watch the older Trek shows, especially TOS. But what a wasted opportunity to not give it to them in the one, and perhaps only, piece of Trek they may ever see.

380. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#378—“I realize that this film was not made for me. It was made for a younger audience that didn’t grow up with Star Trek. ”

I’ve been watching these characters since the 1970’s. I definitely felt like this movie was made for me.

Star Trek’s vision is this:

—-that Humanity not only survives to the 23rd century, but unites to conquer the social ills which plague us today and to explore the final frontier. It is that optimistic view which makes this film very much “Star Trek”, and nothing in the film takes anything away from that vision.

And I’m sorry, but you have a very selective memory when it comes to the history of stories told featuring these characters. For every TOS episode which can be described as “exploring the human condition”, there are two or three more which do no such thing, some of the latter just as memorable as the former.

I’m glad that Star Trek inspired you, and I can even identify with that, since its optimism ran counter to the normal doom and gloom view of the future.

And I am even more sorry that you missed that in ST09.

It was there. And I’m glad that my kids got to see it, as it is not often something depicted in modern takes on our own future.

381. RetroWarbird - May 11, 2009

378 … I agree about hoping that this at least gets some young people to watch old Trek and to learn something about themselves. The loss of intellectual subject matter is probably more important than any of the slight character deviations or Sci-Fi jargon super-geek nitpicks.

I think that’s why quite a few reviews, fan or otherwise, say it’s a good movie but feels like it’s missing something or a little hollow. It’s missing intellect. For as immature as arguments get when we dissect the minutia of pulse phasers vs. beam phases, or actor interpretation, or whatever, can be … Trek fans are typically very mature, thoughtful, and we like things that make us think – AND we’d like non-Trek fans to be mature, thoughtful, and to use their intellects more often.

382. Alex Rosenzweig - May 11, 2009

#358 – “” ‘Star Trek 5 is suddenly a very very VERY GOOD Star Trek film.’

I couldn’t agree with you more.”

I have to question the sanity of both of you.”

You can question mine, too. I liked ST5:TFF better, too. ‘Course, you could have questioned my sanity a long time ago, ’cause I’ve always been in that relative minority that actually liked a lot of ST5, despite its execrable pacing and mediocre opticals (the latter being more a result of insufficient time than insufficient talent, apparently). ;) I consider it in the top half of all the films, and have for a long time.

The discussion of why is best left to a different thread, however. :)

383. CJS - May 11, 2009

I’m not sure who’s worse in this thread, the blind haters or the blind admirers. ST09 is a radical stylistic shift from what has been essentially Star Trek for the last 40 years. It’s by no means your father’s Star Trek. And it’s full of plenty of inexplicable stupidity. That said, it was a solid film, up there with TWOK, TVH, and FC as one of the best films ever to bear the Star Trek name.

384. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#382—-The only thing I liked about that movie was when the credits rolled.

#383—-Why do you consider either to be “blind”?

I am sure we all have our own reasons for either liking or disliking the film.

My primary criteria for judging any movie is whether or not it entertains me, and simply put, this one does. There are 11 Star Trek films, 4 of which I give two thumbs up, 4 of which I can’t stand, and 3 of which I consider to be ‘watchable’.

385. Billy Bobby - May 11, 2009

377

(A) that of all the people who could have beamed down to Ceti Alpha V, one of them had to be a former member of the Enterprise crew;

(B) or that Khan happens to escape exile and gain control of the USS Reliant at the same time that the very man he wishes to exact revenge upon (who has been bound to a desk job by the way) happens to board “the only ship in the quadrant” with all of the major characters from TOS (who all happen to be participating in the training mission);

(C) or that the creators of the Genesis device happen to be the former lover and illegitimate son of Jim Kirk;

(D) or that (without explanation, btw) the Enterprise cannot set the transporter on “maximum dispersion” and beam the armed Genesis device as far away as possible to render it harmless (as it did with Nomad in “The Changeling”)?

Both films are alot of fun, yet both suffer from certain all-too-convenient sequences of events in the plot.

All of those pale in comparison to both Scotty and Old Spock being on Delta Vega. Kirk landed within kilometers of these two characters. Like I said earlier, that was when the movie really lost it. Imagine being jettisoned onto Earth. What are the odds of landing so close to two important people? I have wondered about Part D but I always presumed that the start-up procedure of Genesis effected the Transporter lock. Part C created decent internal conflict that this movie clearly lacks. A movie has to have both external and internal conflicts. Part A and B are good points but hey, at least all of the crew members of the Enterprise weren’t together still after all of those years. This movie made the huge mistake of putting everyone together in this movie. Character introduction should have been spread out over ST 11 and 12.

Minor coincidences occur in most movies. For example, it was a good thing that the crew of the Enterprise was on Vulcan with a Klingon ship when the Probe went to Earth. However, Star Trek 2009 went way too far.

386. Billy Bobby - May 11, 2009

379

The rest of the movie relies on a series of unlikely coincidences and cheats to assemble the TOS crew onto the Enterprise.

Good call.

387. CJS - May 11, 2009

If you can’t see the good for the bad, or can’t see the bad for the good, I’m thinking there’s something wrong with your eyes. I’m sure plenty of people see both, but anyone who mistakes this film for a great piece of art or a spectacular piece of crap isn’t seeing clearly enough in my opinion.

388. Billy Bobby - May 11, 2009

379

The rest of your past was damn good. The ending was truly touching. Like you, Star Trek allowed me to look past bigots and religious radicals in my small-town conservative community. Star Trek was an escape into a better world. This movie did not touch upon any of Roddenberry’s ideals.

389. Billy Bobby - May 11, 2009

387

The first half hour/45 minutes was amazing. I thought Abrams was a good filmmaker after all. However, Abrams did everything wrong towards the end of the movie. It reminded me very much of Indiana Jones 4. The movie got off to a good start but it ended disastrously.

390. Dom - May 11, 2009

383. CJS: ‘I’m not sure who’s worse in this thread, the blind haters or the blind admirers.’

Ah, we’re all pretty bad! If we had lives, we wouldn’t be posting here! ;)

‘ST09 is a radical stylistic shift from what has been essentially Star Trek for the last 40 years.’

Not that much. Star Trek was always ballsy and action-packed in the 60s. What it boils down to is that this Star Trek is made as a new film, not riding on a perceived self-importance of its own history and is lit, shot and edited in a modern way.

Some people think the film should be forelock tugging in respect to what’s gone before, but this film’s punky vibe means it’s aware of its past, but happy to move on.

As for complaints about ‘gods’ and ‘destiny’ in this film: we’ve seen a corrupted timeline that’s stitching itself back together, so, chances are that to function correctly the people who have been knocked off course need to be back in the tight place. Spock even remarks on the coincidence of running into Scotty! Also, we’ve seen plenty of ‘gods’ controlling fate in Star Trek, be they Qs, Metrons, Organians, Apollo or whatever. They’ve always controlled fate to an extent. The later Treks even showed the Federation in such a role, controlling history. There’s been fate for a long time in Star Trek. Also the TOS Enterprise had a chapel.

Roddenberry’s ‘principles’ are overstated by many and certainly less relevant to TOS-era Trek which was developed by a number of writers and producers. Even human religions didn’t get ignored or slagged off in TOS.

391. Daniel - May 11, 2009

What a terribly sad movie. Vulcan leaves a giant hole in the galaxy, one that could never be filled by a shiny new ship with a shiny new and a first officer that is more emotional then any other member of his crew.

Star Trek has become a silly, pointless intergalactic joy ride in the face of 6bn souls lost. The SFX are the best the franchise has ever seen but Star Trek is more then ships and phasers and photon torpedos.

The saddest part is that this will be more successful then any ST movie before it. JJ has taken one of the world’s great utopias and turned it into a meaningless collection of fast paced images.

392. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#385—-“All of those pale in comparison to both Scotty and Old Spock being on Delta Vega. Kirk landed within kilometers of these two characters. ”

I would like to hear how it pales in comparison! The statistical probability of both Khan and Kirk meeting as they did in TWOK under those circumstances in the right place to do battle has to be far lower than the possibility of Kirk finding Spock Prime on Delta Vega when he is chased into that cave. There may only be three people on that planet, but at least they are on the same planet!

“This movie made the huge mistake of putting everyone together in this movie. Character introduction should have been spread out over ST 11 and 12.”

I would also have liked to see certain characters (Chekov in particular) be introduced later, but I see it as a far cry from being a “huge mistake”. Despite whatever your expectations might have been, this was still always going to be just a Star Trek movie—-and what’s a Star Trek movie without contrivance?

“Part C created decent internal conflict that this movie clearly lacks. A movie has to have both external and internal conflicts.”

I disagree that the film lacks that quality. Perhaps you’ve allowed the internal conflict within Quinto’s Spock slip past your mind. It’s not exactly an original struggle, since we’ve seen this struggle dealt with before in Spock Prime, but given the nature of the reintroduction objective of the story—-it’s perfectly understandable—and quite necessary to properly introduce the character.

Where I will say that element is lacking is in the arc for Kirk. Unfortunately, we never see him as anything but vindicated for some of his more reckless lack of discipline. It would have been nice for him to end up more balanced in his view of the universe and his place in it in the end, as does Quinto’s character. But nevertheless, the internal conflict is there, even if it is a bit light. For what is his decision to enter Starfleet instead of self-loathing in Riverside, if not resolution of an “internal conflict”?

This isn’t The Godfather Part II, but it was never going to be… It’s a Star Trek movie.

#388—-“This movie did not touch upon any of Roddenberry’s ideals.”

You mean like presenting an optimistic vision of a future for Humanity in which human beings have united both to conquer the social ills which plague our society today and (even with other species) for common causes of good and benelovence?

Nothing suggests that this vision or, as you put it, “Roddenberry’s ideals”, are absent from this incarnation of Trek. It’s one thing to say you don’t like the movie, but don’t just make things up.

393. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#391—“JJ has taken one of the world’s great utopias and turned it into a meaningless collection of fast paced images.”

TOS never presented any kind of utopia.

TOS was sexy, energetic, funny, romantic, adventurous, and unafraid of a good old-fashioned fistfight.

This sure wasn’t your father’s Star Trek. It was your grandfather’s Star Trek.

It’s about time Star Trek broke out of the box created by the 24th Century geeks only club, and became fun again.

394. doug - May 11, 2009

the real break with trek history? 6 or 7 starfleet ships destroyed in the amount of time it took sulu to figure out how to pilot the enterprise for his first time. the story swept under the rug the loss of those ships… the crew and cadets that had just been assigned to them. trek at its best is not detached like that.

395. Billy Bobby - May 11, 2009

392

It’s one thing to say you don’t like the movie, but don’t just make things up.

I am not making this up. Roger Ebert said the same thing. Ebert said, “The Gene Roddenberry years, when stories might play with questions of science, ideals or philosophy, have been replaced by stories reduced to loud and colorful action.”

393

TOS never presented any kind of utopia.

That’s a laugh. With you clearly liking the movie, I am convinced more than ever this was a bad movie.

396. KPC - May 11, 2009

Hello,
I have been reading some other reviews and while I gave this movie 9/10 I am not sure that I understand why some would stat that those of us who are star trek fans are blind to see that this is not a star trek movie. I can recite every episode in he TOS line by line when I watch them. I have TNG, DS9 and the movies, so I can say that I am a Trek fan, to say that I can be sold anything I think is unfair statement.
This movie is not the TNG era, but before the TOS started, so who is to say what the world looked like. FC showed us that earth was not very advanced when they met the Vulcan’s, so who is to say how far earth advanced to the start of this movie. Also, FC should not have happened and only happened because the crew went back and helped get the ship into warp. Negativity about the timeline being broken and how it does not fit anymore, well is star trek, and happened a lot. If we want to talk about timeline and alternate stuff, then Star Trek should have died in STIV, and everything else that happens in that timeline is alternate reality.
The TOS was a gritty, knuckle bearing (aka-kick drops), wagon train, that was full of optimism, that I think this movie captures. I think the writers and the directors took TOS and made a really kick but movie, but had to link it in some way to what had happened before to make it legit in the timeline.

397. Doug L. - May 11, 2009

re 396…

I too am a long time trek fan… faves are tos, tng, ds9… I’ve never judged a movie or series as good or bad, cause it wasn’t their version of Trek.

Trek fans have to judge this movie on two standards, first and foremost … is it great, good, average, or bad… i judge any movie with the same basic criteria, good plot, good acting, good directing, motivation, development effects, music etc.

2nd, is how does it hold up to our idea of what Star Trek is.

I can accept it as Star Trek, but I don’t feel it’s a great movie. It’s a fun movie at best. But it has a lot of problems. It’s good enough to keep me excited about more.

Reviewers who get too hung up on criticizing it for not being “trek” enough, honestly, aren’t always worth reading. They’re too stuck on an idea they can’t get past, as likewise a lot of reviewers just seem to randomly love it, because it’s new it’s Star Trek and all the critics in the world have given it a green light. Frankly the bar for Trek had been set so low, it would have taken a real turd of a movie to be totally panned. (like Nemesis)

The future of Trek looks bright to me… I think they got enough right to look ahead with optimism about the franchise, I just hope that reasonable critiques are taken into account for the next movie.

Doug L.

398. John from Cincinnati - May 11, 2009

The Good: Let’s face it, Orci and Kurtzamn had a large task ahead of them; reboot the franchise, do it in a way that hardcore trekkers will buy into, do it in a way that new fans will enjoy, tie in the original Spock, show the origins of the main characters and bring it in under 2 hours. Whew! Well, for the most part I think they accomplished what they set out to do. The dialogue was sensational, they really had a feel for Spock and McCoy’s lines. The performances by Bruce Greenwood, Karl Urban and Simon Pegg were phenomenal. Pegg was my surprise performance of the movie, I didn’t think he could be Scotty, but he was. Quinto and Pine did serviceable jobs, but they lack the charisma of Nimoy and Shatner. No knock against them. Saldana and Cho were ok. Yelchin I feel was actually better than most people give him credit for. He just plays a guy that is really Russian. The visual effects were stunning and blew me away, I am glad to see Star Trek finally being done so well. The pace of the movie was fast, the action sequences were great and the movie held my interest all the way through. The opening sequence was heart wrenching and the depth of feeling took me by surprise. This movie left me wanting to see more and can’t wait for the sequel.

The Bad: There were several issues within the plot I had issue with, but as I said earlier, with all that Orci and Kurtzman had to accomplish, I don’t think a perfect plot was possible. In the sequel I would like to see them go away from the “menacing force threatens Earth and the Enterprise is the only starship that can save us” plots. I also have issue with the destruction of Kirk’s backstory. This movie still could have been made while acknowledging Tarsus IV, USS Farragut, Gary Mitchell and Carol Marcus. The notion of Kirk going from a Cadet to Captain of the flagship is unrealistic at best.

The Ugly: Bridge and Engineering. I can accept the changes to the exterior of the big E along with the subtle changes to the TOS era uniforms, but let me reiterate, subtle changes. The bridge and engineering looked alien to me, and worse, uninteresting. The bridge needs to look interesting, as though the viewer can’t take their eyes off it and want to jump on board. Engineering is a disaster to me, again, trying to look realistic yet it looks like an early 20th century steamer ship. Again, Engineering should look interesting and match the exterior and overall feel of the ship. It should look modern. With that said, what worked best in this movie is when it got nostalgic. From the uniforms, to original Spock acknowledging the original Kirk to McCoys lines of “green blooded hobgoblin” to Scotty’s “I’m giving you all she’s got!”, all those worked. What didn’t work is when the movie got away from all that.

Final wrap: In my opinion Star Trek 09 is a very good movie and is highly entertaining. Knowing it takes place in an alternate reality helps resolve any issues I may have. My suggestion for the sequel is to fix the bridge and engineering, have more nostalgic moments and perhaps a nostalgic plot for the next one.

399. John from Cincinnati - May 11, 2009

re: 398

I give the movie 8/10 but still rank TWOK as the best Star Trek movie of all-time.

400. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#395—-Roger Ebert is not the measure of what is or is not the Roddenberry vision. And it bears noting that his review (although not as poor as some have made it out to be) is completely out of touch with the rest of the critics. Nowadays, he’s just an old fart.

As for what constitutes a laugh, I’d say it is the notion that TOS ever depicted any such thing. The concept of utopia in Star Trek originated with Roddenberry revisionism in the late 1980’s.

TOS and the Next Gen-era spinoffs actually had very little in common, and I think it is a mistake to view the two as one entity. While the original series certainly made its share of social commentary (sometimes done well, and other times poorly), revisionists seem to forget that it was basically an adventure series set in space sometime in the distant future. Star Trek, no matter how much some fans want to believe it, has never been profound. That’s a bunch of B.S. And gone are the days when it was seen as clever to disguise controversial commentary in a fictional story. These days, it is a relief to see something so simple, yet optimistic, and without having a sermon or some “utopia”, devoid of human conflict shoved in your face (TNG-style).

ST09 has set the franchise up for a return to its roots—-good entertainment. It hasn’t been this entertaining in decades.

I’m looking forward to an even better installment in the sequel. Damon Lindelof is an excellent storyteller, and his input can only be of benefit to Orci and Kurtzman.

401. Yeoman Smith - May 11, 2009

#400: Yes! Finally someone willing to speak the truth about “Roddenberry revisionism.” The original series and TNG were night and day. This movie is far more faithful to the spirit of the original series than any of the later series, and more faithful than most of the movies. This is Trek as young Gene R. saw it. As for old Gene or Rick Berman, that’s another story.

402. SChaos1701 - May 11, 2009

Back in 2004 when the last episode of Enterprise aired, Star Trek fans were ready to call it a day. There were no plans for a new series, movie, nothing. We were just going to have to rely on our DVD’s, novels, and TV reruns to get our Trek fix. For all intents and purposes Star Trek was dead. Back in July of 2006 it was announced that a new Trek film was in the works. I really didn’t care. Not only was I going through a bad break up but I thought that the film would never see the light of day. I mean come on. You expect me to see someone else other than William Shatner play Captain Kirk? You have to be kidding me. Then came the teaser trailer that was attached to Cloverfield and NCC-1701.com. I actually got excited. Then I found Trekmovie.com and I started becoming excited about the film. When the first pics came out it just kept going. When the trailers started coming out, that was it. I couldn’t wait. It became almost an obsession. I was so desperate to see Trek come back so I just attached myself and clinged to this film. And you know what happens when you become extremely excited about something. It usually doesn’t live up anywhere close to your expectations. So guess what happened….IT EXCEEDED THEM!!!! I saw it Thursday and it took me this long to come down from it so I could write about it.

The film was just incredible. You know how most films start off really high, then level off, then end with a climax? This film just doesn’t let up. It just hits you and hits you. There is no calm moment. I didn’t even take a bathroom break because, if I did, I would have missed something important. After the film, my heart just kept beating hard and I just had to sit there and calm down. I have never left a film like that. I can’t even begin to pick one word to describe this film.

The new cast was just extremely talented and did something that I thought was impossible. Not only did they do justice to these iconic characters, but they made them their own. Chris Pine’s portrayal as Kirk was perfect. He was able to channel his genius and rebelliousness without the pregnant pauses that plagued Shatner’s method of portraying the character. Zachary Quinto, I thought, did a better job at portraying the half-human aspect of Spock than Leonard Nimoy did. I don’t think that Nimoy could have done as good of a job that Quinto did with the Spock/Uhura relationship. Although I have to say that the Spock Prime/Spock scene was incredible. Karl Urban must have been channeling the spirit of DeForest Kelly because it was as if he came back to life and played him. And on top of that he added to the character to McCoy. To pretty much sum this up, Chris Pine is now Jim Kirk. Zachary Quinto is now Spock. Karl Urban is now Dr. McCoy. Simon Pegg is now Scotty. Zoe Sandala is now Nyota Uhura. (Yes, she finally officially has a first name…lol) John Cho is now Hikaru Sulu. Anton Yelchin is now Pavel Chekov. They own these characters now. I can’t believe I’m saying this, but it’s true.

Everything seemed more real than other Trek films. The bridge and corridors were spic and span, but if you’ve ever on a Naval ship, you would have seen the cleanest floors in the world. Even on submarines, they swap the deck when they surface. You could literally eat off them. I like how they did that in the movie. And don’t even get me started on Engineering. It was perfect. I know that some might be put off on the fact that it was filmed in a brewery but it worked. The Engine Room is an industrial and dirty area. It’s not meant to be sterile and in this film it worked perfectly. The bridge was just more realistic. I mean, this is the control center of the ship. It should have more stations and people there. It should be a busy hub and they pulled this off beautifully. I loved the lens flares. It got to a point where you didn’t even notice them anymore. It was like a documentary where they’re out in the field and you can’t set up lights and shots to make it look pretty. Those lens flares gave the film a sense of realism that I haven’t seen in any fictitious movie, let alone a Star Trek film. I see lens flares becoming the new bullet time. Every film is going to want them. The best part was that it was a time travel story but had no reset button to bring everything back to normal and make things “right.” We have to live with the changes.

Now there is this whole “canon” argument with some of the hardcore nerds (whom I call “The Vocal Minority”) who need to realize that Star Trek is FICTION. I can understand making sure that you keep the important stuff and keeping with the theme of the franchise. But getting pissy because the viewscreen is now a window with a H.U.D. (which I think makes more sense) or that the nacelle caps are blue instead of red is just nitpicking. For a long time, canon was pretty essential to making sure that everything fit in right but now it’s become something that has started to hinder the franchise. Star Trek needed a reboot. We needed something fresh. Besides, even Gene Roddenberry would go against “canon” whenever it suited him. Canon became something that, instead of guiding the franchise, strangled it. I would have liked the movie even without the alternate timeline explanation.

Someone asked me to rate the movie out of 5 stars. Well, I give this movie 11 out of 5 stars. Yes I liked it that much. Not only has it surpassed Star Trek VI as my favorite Star Trek movie but it is now tied for my absolute favorite movie of all time. I can’t even begin to describe how much I loved this movie. I’ll just say this. J.J. Abrams brought back to life what Rick Berman killed. STAR TREK IS BACK!!!!

403. Closettrekker - May 11, 2009

#401–“This is Trek as young Gene R. saw it. As for old Gene or Rick Berman, that’s another story.”

Well put.

For every episode of TOS which one might construe as commentary on the human condition, there are two more whose sole purpose is to place the characters in an action sequence.

404. Captain Haro - May 11, 2009

#402. SChaos1701
WOW – I could not have said it better. I just want to add a few things. If you love the orginal series like I do, great. You will always have that and it can never be taken from you but try to like this for what it is. In my opinion the orginal casts chemistry is unmatched by any other Trek series that followed. Now don’t get me wrong, I loved TNG, I loved DS9, I watched both VOY and Enterprise but they never captured exactly what TOS cast had. That said I think this new cast has brought back that chemistry in a big way, it is like magic! Besides it brings Star Trek back to where it belongs, centerstange!

From a design stand point I can see where they tried to bridge the design of TOS Enterprise and TMP Enterprise and the new design works for me. “I like the color blue, it’s exciting!” The bridge works for me too. However, engineering, the waterworks and the shuttle bay I have questions about. From a filmakers standpoint I understand where J.J. was trying to go, but it was all to industrial for me. I think the scale was also way off on engineering. The other item that caught my atention was the plastic strips the captain of the Kelvin had walk through in his shuttle. It was like he worked in some old grocery stores meat department. I know they wanted to have things look like they were from the future but on the afore mentioned items I think they missed.

You know, going from cadet to Captain in the blink of an eye is unbelievable. But no more unbelievable then someone coming back from the dead. Sure you were all ok with that when Spock did it. Besides if anyone were able to become captain overnight, James T. Kirk would be that man.

What I am getting at is it is fiction, it is entertainment, and as much as I would love to someday feel the deck plates of a starship shake below my feet, it won’t likely happen. See, I left a little hope. If you do not like what J.J. Abrams, Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci have done, here is what you do. Go to filmaking school or writting school and then ask Paramount for your shot at the belt. Till then, sit back and just enjoy!
I just think even if Gene Roddenberry himself had rose from the grave to do this Movie people would have found something to bitch about. It is just how people are. Never happy, never enough……

I think it was great, They got my ten bucks and I was entertained, job well done!

405. Nix - May 11, 2009

Roddenberry would’ve never done this movie if he was alive, let alone rise from the grave… or descend from the grave as it were since he’s floating in space.

406. SChaos1701 - May 11, 2009

405

He wrote it as a space western. He would have liked it.

407. SChaos1701 - May 11, 2009

404 Captain Haro

Thanks for the kudos man. With you’re username, I just have one question. Are you a Gundam fan? If you are, I should tell you about the time I met Tomino who, in my mind, is the Gene Roddenberry of Japan.

408. Charles Trotter - May 11, 2009

Hmm, I forgot my ranking. Um… 10/10. Best Trek yet, I thought. Despite the occasional eye-roll moment. :)

409. Keep the Faith - May 11, 2009

You know you enjoyed the movie when you’re still thinking about it the next day at work.

9.5

Previous posted so just some follow-up thoughts:

Wouldn’t it be interesting to somehow see an interaction between Spok Prime and his father in the sequel?

Father and son never mind melded in the “prime” universe. Only after Sarek’s death and Jean Luc Picard’s offer to let Spok mind meld that he got to intimately touch his father’s thoughts.

Now they can. Interesting possibilities.

——

Don’t get me wrong I loved the movie.
But afterward I was thinking about Nero.

If you could go back in time 129 years, instead of exacting revenge wouldn’t you take steps to inform Romulus what their future held so they could advance plan, colonize another planet and avoid the tragedy? Thus ensuring the survival of your wife, your family, yourself and your race?

I realize Nero was consumed with hateful thoughts, and all.

But if it were you, wouldn’t you show the evidence and warn your home planet? Wouldn’t you take steps to ensure history didn’t repeat itself? Wouldn’t you give that advanced weaponry to your home world so they could defeat their enemies?

Nevermind, that might make for a boreing movie.

Well done.
LOVED the flick.

410. Nix - May 11, 2009

406

no

411. SChaos1701 - May 11, 2009

410

Yeah…that’s why he called it a wagon train to the stars.

302

Hitting on a woman is not sexual assault. What’s wrong with you?

412. SixtiesTrekker - May 11, 2009

I have watched the various versions of Trek since the original episodes aired on TV. I don’t go to the conventions etc. but I am a fan.

I saw the new film on Thursday. I thought it was a good effort and enjoyed it somewhat. I purposely did not read or watch anything concerning the new film before it came out so that I could watch it on it’s own merits.
Once the full plot of the time travel/ alternate universe was fully revealed, it seemed okay until the end when there really was a cop out in my opinion.
It’s not that the movie couldn’t stand by itself as a good film, it’s more that I was hoping to see a brilliant way of making the original story line jive with this new “episode”. I was hoping the writers/producers would do something extraordinary, in the same way that Kirk or Spock would do to save everybody “in the good ol’ days”, but for us fans, that kept Trek going for so long.

Overall, I guess its a lot like Lord of the Rings or Dune in that its very hard to make such a complex story translate to the big screen.

In that alone, Trek fans should be happy that the Canon has gotten to that status.

And who knows, maybe the next film will be about a rescue of the original time line to save the vulcans….. it would be “only logical”.

413. Buzz Lancaster - May 12, 2009

.
To me, this film was a deep emotional experience… For many things it blew out my mind and my heart…! previously, only in Generations I had a had such a deep impact in my mind and my hearth, with the “death” of Kirk on screen – even in the worst form it was I thought about the death of the icon, the character I grew up loving and caring about, and the real possibility to be the last time (as it was and is in fact, until now) to be the last time I was seeing my favorite character (and actor) on screen.

This NEW Star Trek movie will certainly be (and it is already ) a mark and a new point in the history of Star Trek franchise, for whatever reason one may or choose to label it. It’s a natural born classic – and epic.

First of all I must say I’m a “classic” fan. I watched the original Star Trek on reruns on TV (here in Brazil, of course). And I grew up knowing very little about the Star Trek existence and not paying any attention to it until was about 14, when I was already beginning into Science Fiction and Star Trek really got my attention. It was love at first sight – really…! I couldn’t stop watching everyday! And it was late that year (1981) that ST:TWOK came on big screen and the first time Star Trek blew off my mind and senses…!

Now, almost 30 years later, this NEW Star Trek blows new life breath to a “dying” (in therms…) franchise with a brand new movie, a new vision and a possibility to explore a brave new world – or better saying, a full new universe!

THIS is really NOT “our father’s” Star Trek, for sure…! it is not even OURS Star Trek either. I’m sure my 13 years old daughter will LOVE this movie for all it is, the emotion, the thrilling, the adventure, even the characters, that she grew up knowing that I liked, cared and loved – even if she would not quite understanding why…!

This a Star Trek for a REAL “Next Generation”, with a complete new life and new civilizations to explore, to seek out and effectively make Star Trek to endure for maybe another 30 some years or more!!

Technically the movie is a blast! Well written in all senses, well tied-up, all we see and understand makes sense. They got a fine new reason to make all different and NOT to be against ALL that came previously. YET, they got “elements” (catch phrases, characters, mannerisms, little things) that could be recognized as part of the inherent KNOWN universe of Star Trek…!

This Star Trek made me weep again. When this new Kirk was born and his dad was dying… when “Spock-prime” appeared and said “I’ve been and always shall be your friend”, and melded the new Kirk’s mind… the final meeting of both Spocks and the speech about the chance for both young, Kirk and Spock, to have the same relation that he, the old Spock so cared.

Emotionally, to a real fan of Trek (maybe the old or “classic” ones), this movie is a spectacle to the senses. Something maybe to be absorbed with time. Yet, from the beginning it’s impact is of a punch in the face. All is new, yet recognizable. New, but still Trek – the same Trek so many of us love… It’s a very hard experience!

In my opinion, the movie is very well directed. Perhaps some little slips here and there, but all in all quite good. It is complex but still easy to understand. And even non-fans can appreciate and have fun with it. As a product, it is a nice one.

The characters are all there. And most surprisingly as it may be not all (to me) work as they should. Since from the beginning, the most iconic and commented character was Spock. How he would be, who he would be, many things. The physical similarity of Quinto with Nimoy was most celebrated and the blessings of the “Old Spock” to the new one almost canonized not only the choice of this young actor to the part but also the future success of the movie.

Strange as it can be, it was not the Spock character that got my attention. Spock is a larger than life icon. Nimoy is an iconic actor. The character of Spock is so well defined that not much could be done with it. It is what it is. He is whom he is. But for some reason I cannot tell the Quinto interpretation of Spock seemed to me a bit overdone. THIS Spock, of THIS line of time (or dimension) seems different of the “original” one. If there are any fictional “reasons” for him to be like this, like he is in this movie, they are yet to be revealed. But to my senses it is simply either a direction’s choice and/or the actor’s own way to be (and this is not a critic to Quinto). The characterization is all right. Perfect as can be, but Quinto delivers a way too much human and irrational. He (the character) maybe lost or stuck in two worlds but THIS Spock seemed to have chosen the path of emotion other than logic…

On the other hand, much less was said and maybe even lesser was expected (yet with great expectations) of Chris Pine’s Kirk… With Shatner out of the movie, and the premise that Pine would NOT try to emulate Kirk’s mannerisms and acting style, the character had the expectation of something utterly new and separated from the all known until here.

But to me Pine brings a new Kirk full of natural elements of the original one. Intentionally or not, this new Kirk seems much more closer to the original than the new Spock of Quinto. The boldness of Kirk is there, maybe the look, things I can’t describe now, but maybe seeing the film another time can clear on me. But Pine’s Kirk is “real”, natural, and seems like a natural projection of a Kirk that we saw as an adult in the classic Trek – even if in THIS time-line all can turn differently.

The other character that is a joy and homage to the original one is Dr. McCoy. Karl Urban did his homework in stepping in DeForest Kelley’s shoes providing a performance that is all his but all “Trek” too. He IS McCoy as much as he can be and as close to what it is known to “how Dr. McCoy is”… Urban’s performance is fine, and a pleasure.

The other main characters are quite OK.

Saldana’s Uhura seemed to me more developed one. Smart, sexy, nice. I couldn’t buy her “relationship” with Spock but… if she is a hardcore student (what she seems to be ) hum… it could be possible… BUT… What about Spock?? What about the “struggle” with his “human side” and his own “emotions”…?? Hum… Not nice. Thumb down on this…

Cho’s Sulu does well. Nice fight scenes. In the bridge he seems to be “learning” to be a pilot yet but this is nothing too bad to compromise the character.

Yelchin’s Chekov is more like an irritating recreation of Wesley Crusher with a Russian accent. By the way maybe too strong an accent… This new Chekov may be the character with less to do with the original one…

Pegg’s Scotty is fine. A little bit too “funny” but interesting. I don’t know if he pays a tribute to the original character emphasis on the light site of Scotty’s or if the humor is inherent to the actor.

Greenwood’s Pike is very good. Strong, firm, wise. I just don’t buy the fact that ALL Captains in this movie have the habit to go alone and deliver themselves to the enemies… Isn’t it against the rules??

The villain, Nero is almost believable. At least he is more “human” (pun intended) than any other “crazy” villain who just want to conquer-or-destroy the universe. His reasons are all emotional, but his craziness is what turns the Star Trek universe upside-down. I was not able to understand how Nero’s ear was “chewed” or whatever… In the movie he makes a mysterious character, dark, witty, a real bad-ass. For a miner he is quite a clever architect and a villain with an agenda.

Visually the movie is fantastic! All wonderfully done. The effects are superb! In terms of design, the Enterprise works perfectly – for this film and time-line… Disbelief suspended… The sets are amazing and even the bridge (way too advanced to what was known but coherent to a future imagined from TODAY could be retro-thought) is acceptable. The only thing that I thought didn’t work was the engineering and all that pipes and that “factory feeling”… Too weird.

All in all the movie is one of the best Treks ever. But it is a sad movie… The universe is different. Spock looses his mother. Vulcan is gone and the Vulcans are now a race in extinction… As a movie this is a joy to the eyes and mind. It is the future of the franchise. All can happen now.

Tomorrow I’ll go o see the movie again… I hope I’ll not cry again, because I’ll already know what it is going to be… BUT… who knows. Star Trek is part of my life. As I said in the beginning, the movie to me was an emotional experience… A sad one in many ways.

One is to recognize that I’m growing older. This is not “my father’s Star Trek”…This is not even “MY” Star Trek… It is strange to realize that Star Trek must grow and must evolve to continue… Perhaps as we did grow old too, and one day we took control of our own life, Star Trek now “grows” to have it’s “new life”…!

As well as one day we were told to “get a life” and we got it, and we evolved and we became adults. Now I see my daughter turning from a child to a young teenager, I get myself thinking of the process that makes us all part of the life cycle. As we grew and evolved to turn into adults, so Star Trek may grow, change and expand to go on “living”.

The (new) future is yet to be written… A SECOND movie can settle a new path for all that is brought in this movie… We have really a new beginning. But the old Spock is there yet. All I can imagine now is WHAT can be done with this “alternative” future that is going to be written. And I can’t help but to think of a second movie that may somehow include Shatner in it… If James Kirk was a great man in “another life”, maybe in THIS ONE he can be alive and well – WHY NOT…??

I miss all that Star Trek WAS… But I prize all that this NEW Star Trek brings… As in that famous line “we will always have Paris” I say that we (old-and-classic-Trek-fans) will always have the Classic & Original Trek…! We must learn to control our passions, live with what is important to us and let the world evolve…!

Long life to Star Trek – whatever universe or time-line it is…!!!
.

414. Doug L. - May 12, 2009

re 404 “You know, going from cadet to Captain in the blink of an eye is unbelievable. But no more unbelievable then someone coming back from the dead. ”

This is one of my main criteria in sci-fi/ fantasy… Yes we had no problem that in Star Trek it may be possible for people to come back from the dead… If told well, and well founded… I suspend my belief on things like this as it’s a part of the universe they created…

However they also created a reality based on people behaving normally or in someway in a relatable fashion based on true life. Kirk being elevated to Captain is “unrealistic” within the framework of the universe they created.

I also can’t stand the notion that because there are so many mediocre movies out there, that we should simply lower the bar and accept that, “well hey, it was pretty and entertaining, it doesn’t have to be THAT good”… I hear this a lot these days.

While there is obviously an enormous subjective element here… (and I’m a huge JJ Abrams fan, and a huge Star Trek fan)… This movie could have been a LOT better than it was.

Some decisions in this movie make little or no sense to me from a creative standpoint. I had fun watching this one… but I’m expecting a lot more from the next.

Doug L.

415. Florian Caspar - May 12, 2009

How to make a review of the new Trek movie puzzled me for a while, but I will try to state my opinion in a PRO/CONTRA list:

WHATS GOOD/PRO:

– it is entertaining as hell… those two hours in the cinema fly by at warp speed 9,975

– still there are some great character moments: the destruction of the Kelvin/Kirk’s birth, Amanda/Spock, McCoy/Kirk

– the casting is exceptionally well: Quinto, Pine and especially Urban do a very fine job, it is not mimicry, but still they capture the very essence of those legendary personas

– the special effects and sets are executed brilliantly

– it has humor and that puts it close to the TOS-way of telling a story

– Leonard Nimoy: just seeing and hearing him on the screen made me really happy. Nimoy has that kind of aura that is enigmatic and heart-warming at the same time.

– The Kobayashi Maru scene works very well. It’s there and in the very end of the movie that Pine IS Kirk, being as close to Shatner’s portrayal as possible.

WHAT IS BAD/CONTRA:

– the story lacks any kind of compelling drive, momentum or urgency: it comes along like jack out of a box and is assembled like a LEGO-kit for sci-fi stories, lacking essential plot points and logical (yes, Mr. Spock) connections between story arcs.
Examples: Nero is mad at Spock because he came to late to rescue Romulus. Why? Hasn’t Spock tried his best. If Nero believes Spock left Romulus to die on purpose it needs to be articulated.
What happened to the Narada in those 25 years they waited for Spock?
What is Nero’s background? Kirk’s background is left almost untouched as well. What made him the brat we find in the Corvette?

– as a result of the above point: the film’s villain does not work at all, there is no wrath of Khan, no arrogance of Kruge, no infatuation of Chang, no amorality of the Borg Queen, not even the wackiness of Sybok: Nero is simply attacking and killing people and we never really get to know why, what kind of emotion drives him, and where it comes from

– the music: as a conductor I always pay close attention to the score of a movie, and this one left me disapointed: the main theme for example (if you can call those 5 french horn notes such) is far from the brilliance of the First Contact theme, or even Illias Theme or the Holst’ian Opening of TUC. The action music is so corny it is almost a parody. But beyond comparing apples and oranges: the main problem is that the score is not adding to the characters and stories but rather distracting from them by not delivering a unique emotional language to the movie. It sounds like it could have been the score to ANY action adventure. it has no own voice. Speaking of voice: the chorus parts are totally out of proportion and serve no purpose other than having the additional oomph of a choir singing (compare: Generations (voices for the Nexus), TUC (the Klingons))

– the alternate reality solution: that’s such an easy card to pull… the easiest way to get rid of any limitations in storytelling, limitations like: the previously totally differently shown relationsships (Sarek/Spock, Uhura/Kirk, Uhura/Spock). It’s like the “JR was not shot, but it was dream” way of liberating a story.

– some nit-picking: why does the Enterprise’s engine room look like a 19th century water plant? why is the Narradas “interrogation” room flooded? why does the Enterprise need water pipes the size of a 30,000’s city?

IN CONCLUSION:
I still like the movie, it is a good start for a new “old” generation. As wish for the future: more story, less action, more urgency, less fussiness, more reasons, less baselessness, more music, less noise.

RATING:
7/10

And as a German: the German lip-synch is OK, sometimes a bit over-acted (as in the Bar scene).

416. Closettrekker - May 12, 2009

I still have some complaints about the film, and they are really centered around James T. Kirk.

I didn’t care for the rapid ascension of Kirk from cadet to captain. That totally stretches the bounds of believability. I also felt it was unnecessary to the story. Everything in the story could have been accomplished by these young characters without promoting him to captain in 2258. Even if the writers had wanted to end the story with Kirk and everyone else in their familiar positions on the bridge, this could have been done with a leap forward in time at the end.

Also, I would rather have seen Kirk grow a bit more in between his behavior on the KM test and taking over the center seat aboard the Enterprise. Unfortunately, Kirk is nothing but vindicated for all of his behavior—which not only encompasses cheating, but disrespecting superior officers, both in a formal hearing on his behavior and on the bridge of a starship (where he displays nothing short of a total lack of respect for authority and chain of command). Everyone around Kirk is humbled, yet he is never humbled himself (which is something I believe would only have endeared him more to the audience).

The rest of the film is absolutely terrific, in my opinion. I have no problem with the contrivances and coincidences in the plot. After all, this is a Star Trek movie, and this is something that even the best of them have traditionally been reliant upon.

417. KPC - May 12, 2009

416.
Did Kirk not always break the rules to achieve the aim of the msn, in essence to get it done. He stole a star ship in STIII, which I think pales in comparison to what he did in this movie. In STII did he not stat the he did not believe in the no win scenario and there is always a way out, always another way. How many times did he break the prime directive, to do the right thing? This Kirk is bolder in his actions and the older Kirk was refined with age on how to break the rule.

Just a thought.

418. Jtrekker - May 12, 2009

This is a friend of mine, but I just had to post it because I thought it gives a great way of seeing Star Trek from a kids perspective:

I was shocked! Ben was excited about going to the movies, but when he heard what we were going to see – he crossed his arms and said “I have absolutely no interest in that!”

Then as they played the trailers for Transformers and GI Joe, he said “If STAR TRACK is anything like that, I’d be interested.” So I knew he was warming up. Before you know it, he was asking questions and laughing at “Bones.” It was like watching ice thaw! LOL!

Kate was much more optimistic. She was excited and laughed… and then the first time she saw Spock do his fingers, she was busy trying to get hers to part that way. She was awfully proud of herself when she figured it out!

Even the baby was kicking like crazy! We can’t wait for a sequel!

419. Closettrekker - May 12, 2009

#417—-“Did Kirk not always break the rules to achieve the aim of the (mission), in essence to get it done(?)”

I can think of two instances where he clearly disobeyed orders—-“Amok Time” and TSFS. In both cases, it was to save the life of Spock.

The first case ended up okay only due to the interference of T’Pau on behalf of the Enterprise. The second resulted in formal charges and demotion (and would have been alot worse if they had not saved the planet on the way home). In neither instance was he actually rewarded for disobeying orders.

“In STII did he not stat the he did not believe in the no win scenario and there is always a way out, always another way(?) ”

Yes, but he also ends up introspectively questioning what he had believed all along to be acceptable. By the end of the film, he realizes that he had never faced what the KM test was really all about—-he had never faced death, but instead, cheated it and patted himself on the back for his own ingenuity. TWOK introduces the notion that he cheated, but he ends up humbled over it in the end in what is supposed to be a conversation with his son—but is actually a conversation with himself.

Now, of course, I have no problem with that particular issue remaining open in the end of this film. After all, Kirk Prime does not come to this realization until many years after the test.

My concern is more that he is never anything but vindicated for behavior that Kirk himself would never tolerate from his own subordinates. I understand completely that he is unrefined and not yet fully developed (all the more reason that he should not yet be made a captain, IMO). I just wanted to see something, even if only a morsel of growth within him between his behavior toward a superior officer (twice) and gaining a starship command—-something which demonstrates that he knows the difference between a great leader who is unafraid to bend the rules and a loose cannon.

Kirk’s development is my only issue with the film. I thought that Spock’s development was great.

420. VulcanNonibird - May 12, 2009

@346 – starfleet uniform badges:

If you start to complain about that lets go back to the early TOS episodes were there was no “Starfleet” but UESPA (United Earth Space Probe Agency) instead. Or in “Where No Man Has Gone Before” the Enterprise was powered my Lithium Crystals and not “Di”lithium Crystals. Or how about Captain Pike firing Lasers not Phasers in “The Cage”? Or: Klingons! – still not answered during TOS Movies, TNG, DS9,….

Now really I think this was among many things we should call “a work in development”. For me Starfleet always was flying the Delta Shield logo since its creation on all ships, buildings, flags, uniforms, what-have-you,…

421. Jefferies Tuber - May 12, 2009

317. cagmar – May 10, 2009

Fair enough, cagmar. My point is that there are way too many reviews on this board that are based on personal taste or whim, without any identifiable criteria, reviews that break Anthony’s rule about saying what is and is not Trek, or so-called reviews that include dialog for scenes that they feel should have been written. That’s narcissistic. No film is the work of one person, especially not Trek. Reviews that just list likes and dislikes [297] don’t help the filmmakers, they just satisfy the reviewers need for validation.

For better or worse, in my opinion, reviews should focus on the fact/the hope that the Supreme Court is paying attention. Reviews should also take into account the business goals of the movie, rather than suggesting another 30-60m of scenes they wished they’d seen regardless of whether they’d slow the movie down or bore new viewers to death.

I wouldn’t suggest that reviews shouldn’t be personal. Clearly we all have our personal stories of why we’re posting on a fansite. But filmmaking is an art built on the creative energies and business instincts of people whose careers are on the line. They deserve reviews that at least attempt to consider the work on its own, rather than in comparison to one’s expectations.

All I’m sayin’ is, it’s not just about me or you or any one of us.

422. Kristy - May 12, 2009

I disagree with a lot of the way things were done in this movie. There were too many changes from the previous Star Trek films and TV shows. I thought Kirk was not a likable character. He was too cocky, too rebellious, seemingly for no reason. He broke the rules because he thought they didn’t apply to him, not because he cared so much about doing the right thing like the real Kirk did. The Spock/Uhuru romance was unnecessary. There was too much action and special effects and not enough character interaction and problem-solving through communication and understanding. To me, the latter is what Star Trek has always been at least partially about and this movie didn’t have that. I give it 2/10.

423. Closettrekker - May 12, 2009

#422—“There was too much action and special effects and not enough character interaction and problem-solving through communication and understanding. To me, the latter is what Star Trek has always been at least partially about and this movie didn’t have that.”

Unfortunately, Captain Robau’s attempt at problem-solving through communication and understanding yielded an undesirable result.

Sometimes, we must fight. I have no problem with that (and neither did the Kirk we all know and love).

But I do agree with your assertion that Kirk was not as likable as he could have been, which is why I suggested that he should have been humbled at some point in the story as a result of some of his more questionable behavior. There wasn’t enough growth and development in him before he ended up in the captain’s chair.

Kirk Prime was egotistical, and certainly unafraid of bending rules he felt were in his way, but there was a discipline about him that is missing from Pine’s Kirk at this point. Theoretically, I have no issue with that, since this Kirk’s inner growth is perhaps stunted by the absence of his father and he is, after all, a younger Kirk than the one we knew. It only became a problem for me when the story rewarded him for that lack of discipline by giving him permanent command of the Enterprise.

I still think he had some growing to do.

424. Jtrekker - May 12, 2009

To someone who may have made it this far down the list, and by this point, has not actually seen the movie, I would certainly encourage you to go watch the film before reading to many of the reviews. The primary reason, because it may taint your experience. Regardless of what the reviews are saying, Star Trek, on it’s merits as “just a movie” is an entertaining thrill ride of a film. And on a basic Star Trek level, it’s fun, contains familiar elements, and keeps the basic idea of the series alive.

For those who have seen the movie, I understand there were problems with the film. I also understand that for some of you, it went a totally different direction that what you had hoped for. But, we have to realize that what is done is done. The sad part is, I’m seeing reviews that make this movie sound worse than Nemesis, and I don’t understand that. If you give the movie 2/10 stars, then would something like Nemesis or The Final Frontier rate like a 1/10? To me, that is not giving this movie justice. And primarily because, for better or worse, this film used elements that actually brought in an audience over the weekend and helped revitalize the franchise. And if for no more reason that the fact that BECAUSE OF THIS MOVIE, we now have a ton more merchandise available and an even higher level of awareness of The Original Series, it at least deserves a 5 out of 10.

I think the ironic part is, The Onion released a fake news story talking about how Trekkies/Trekkers didn’t like the film because it was enjoyable or because it didn’t have enough dull moments. Now, with some of the reviews and complaints on this site, I’m starting to believe The Onion could have made that story using real people. Are we really that disappointed that we didn’t get another version of Spock’s Brain for the big screen?

And, seriously, please tell me how – other than for Nero – that Wrath of Kahn, Voyage Home, or any of the other movies you want to compare to this are so much better that they would outrank this movie by more than 70 or 80%? I’m not saying those aren’t good movies, and yes, they do have the original cast, but there wasn’t all that many elements in any of the previous movies that weren’t used on some level in this movie. In my opinion, for that fact alone, we are still comparing apples to apples, not apples to seaweed.

So, to end this “review” or sorts, my point is to say that Star Trek is a good movie – not great, not excellent , just good. And to me, that is an awesome thing. Why? Because that gives us so much room to hope for an EVEN BETTER movie in 2 to 3 years! And the reason why that’s a good thing, is because Star Trek Lives! Maybe not exactly as how we all expected it to continue, but I’ll take this over nothing at all.

JJ, Bob, Alex, Damon, etc., thank you for doing the job that so many others feared because of the whole reason I had to write this review in the first place. Your abilities and perseverance have allowed us, the fans (those who support you and those who don’t) to have one more shot to boldly go where no one has gone before. Thank you for this, and thank you for giving the Star Trek community something to debate about for another 40 years…

425. Doug L. - May 12, 2009

re JTrekker 424 –

Good points and good advice. I for one ranked this movie at 6 out of 10.

I would say it might be interesting to compare this to some other recent moives… I’ll say i’m in the minority for thinking The Dark Knight was also similarly over abundantly praised for being beyond criticism, and I frankly was underwhelmed by that too.

Here are some ranking comparisons:

ST Nemesis – 2/10
ST Insurrection – 3/10
First Contact – 7/10
Voyage Home – 7/10
TMP directors 6/10
TWK – 7/10

Non Trek Comparisons

Quantum of Solace 4/10
Transformers 8/10
Indiana Jones Crystal Skull 2/10
Batman Dark Knight 5/10
Iron Man 9/10
Wolverine 4/10
Spiderman 2 9/10

I wholeheartedly encourage everyone to See Star Trek, I think it’s a good movie, i intend to let the crowds die down then go see it again on I-Max…
Trek Lives, but judging it after the fact, it has a lot of flaws, so i still had fun anyway, and I think so will everyone else.

Doug L.

426. Florian Caspar - May 12, 2009

# 425 – you gotta be kidding… transformers 8/10? spiderman 2 9/10? iron man 9/10? I am so glad, that our tastes differ substantially…

427. Mazzer - May 12, 2009

Okay, before I saw the actual movie, I was (in my own mind) defending its need to become a summer action movie in order to revitalize Star Trek and bring it into the modern mainsteam. But after seeing it last night, I have to say that–although I was very entertained in places–it was an overall disappointment.

First, I was suprised at just how dumb the story was. Sure, a summer action film can’t be over-sophisticated, but this came across as simplistic, contrived, and corny. There really wasn’t much to learn beyond what we’ve seen in the trailers and articles. And although I know that things have to move along fast in a movie, I found that the Kirk/Spock transition from adversaries to “old buddies” was sudden and unbelievable, as was Kirk’s general progression. If many of us notice this and are distracted by it, then the movie hasn’t handled it properly.

As for the visual design, I like the Enterprise, but I HATED the blurry, in-your-face, shaky-cam style to the space scenes. You rarely get a good look at anything, and it’s hard to see what’s going on. I swear – some time in the future, we’re going to be looking back at the films from this decade and laughing at the goofy approach they used to convey a kinetic action scene. Hell, Star Wars had fast paced space action, but you could always see everything clearly.

Still, I thought the main Enterprise characters were excellent. Kudos for that area. Nero, on the other hand, was flat and boring as a villian — it somehow kept reminding me of Star Trek: Nemesis… enough said.

So yeah, some elements I liked, but the real test for me is this: I wouldn’t want to own this one on disc.

428. Doug L. - May 12, 2009

re 426 – Florian

well what are your rankings? I think it lends an interesting framework to guage where people are coming from…

I realize i’m also in a minority on Transformers, but I thought it was a lot of fun, and had actually never watched the cartoons so I didn’t bring any preconceived notions to it. Which is how I think a lot of viewers are with the new Star Trek. To me though, the differences between the two movies is that Transformers didn’t throw any WTF moments in your face, or a myriad of lame coincidences as I recall… and motivations are very clear, Bad Robots, Good Robots. You don’t have to go any deeper.

But I’d defend Spiderman 2 and Iron Man… I think these are THE benchmark comic movies to measure by… (and Batman Begins.)

Doug L.

429. Doug L. - May 12, 2009

re 426 and 428

also did these rankings very much on the fly. might’ve tweaked if I spent a little more time on them.

DL

430. Doug L. - May 12, 2009

Sorry, rambling a little…

A little more on what works and what doesn’t in my book.

Spiderman 2 works… Spiderman 3 doesn’t
Aliens works Alien 3 doesn’t
Terminator 2 is amazing, Terminator 3 is just okay…

Whatever differences you can ascribe between those films sums up what works for me in an action adventure movie and what doesn’t.

DL. (more interested in Trek reviews than work today)

431. Kirok - May 12, 2009

The one WTF moment that bothers even fans of the movie is Kirk’s rapid promotion to Captain at the end of the film. However, there are plausible explanations for this. First, he did manage to almost single-handedly save Earth and the rest of the Federation from Nero (yes, the rest of the crew helped, but they never would have even made it to Earth without Kirk taking over the ship). Second, he’s the son of a famous Starfleet hero. (And anyone who thinks there isn’t any nepotism in the military doesn’t know much about the military.) Third, there’s something of a shortage of dynamic young officers, given that Nero killed most of them in the siege on Vulcan. Fourth, and most relevant: Spock Prime, who clearly has a fair amount of clout with the Federation (he seems to be leading the efforts to establish a new Vulcan homeworld), could have put in a good word for him. Spock knows what Kirk is capable of, and that, combined with the other factors, may well have been enough to persuade Starfleet that the young cadet deserved his own command.

432. ZtoA - May 12, 2009

I saw the movie again today and really paid attention to the music and sound design. Talk about paying homage! Forget the bridge, and phasers, those were obvious. The not so obvious were ambient sounds like the ice planet Kirk is morooned on. Layered in the wind mix were the haunting voices used in TOS for places like the planet on Mud’s Women. Also, during the scene where the E is escaping the black hole, the orginal warp engine sound is mixed in as the E strains to escape the gravity cloud. The tribble purr was nicely done too.

On another note, during the bar scene I saw many of those crazy colored, polka-dot mini-skirts. It looked like a few of the girls walked right off the Rodenberry set of the 60’s… groovy!

433. Sci-Fi Bri - May 12, 2009

in ST2011 i want to see the enterprise just beat to hell… i’d love to see some massive destructions… like what happened to the Constellation in the doomsday machine.

we tested the crew, time to test the ship. that black hole was a wuss.

434. Ultimate Trekker - May 12, 2009

Everything I want to say has been covered by one of the above posters. But I have one request for the filmmakers for the sequel:

Pleeeeeez more Dr. McCoy/Karl Urban!! I don’t know why he didn’t get more screen time… whether the production crew didn’t like KU in some way, or if they thought Uhura was more important.

But this guy IS Leonard McCoy. There is something very endearing about this character. Karl Urban gets it.

I went into Burger King to get the Star Trek glasses today and the options were ‘Kirk’, ‘Spock’, ‘Uhura’, ‘Nero’

Huh? Nero? Uhura? Where is Bones?

Please complete the triumvirate. Pleeeeeez!!!!!!!!!!!

435. Steve - May 12, 2009

I just saw the movie tonight, I’d probably give it a 9 out of 10.

As many have said here, I find the idea of promoting Kirk straight from Cadet to Captain ridiculous. But, as it’s an alternate reality, I guess they have some different rules, so I’ll let that slide.

436. Nivenus - May 12, 2009

Finished this review not long ago.

I saw Star Trek opening day (but not night) – which was last Friday (May 8th). For those who follow me regularly it’s easy enough to tell that I was looking forward to it. This is in spite me being a bit iffy about the writers’ reluctance to commit to a specific description of the film, worries about the film trying to simultaneously remain ideologically “pure” while also attracting new fans, and the fact I wasn’t too thrilled with the last season of Lost (Season 3), though, recently, I’ve been considering going back and watching the much praised Season 4. But, everything I heard about the film seemed more and more pleasing.

This gave me secondary worries. I was worried, for instance, that I might be disappointed, that my expectations might exceed the reality. I was worried that I’d leave the film, sighing and saying “well, that was pretty good but still…”

I am happy to say this was (mostly) not the case. Overall, I think J.J. Abrams and his crew have done a wonderful job rebooting the franchise. And yes, as I covered in the above review, this is a reboot (albeit not of the strictly blank slate variety). But it does so in such a way that will undoubtedly please many of the most ardent fans of Star Trek (whichever series) while also successfully updating Star Trek to pop culture status in a way I didn’t even really think was possible. Seriously.

If you haven’t seen this movie already, I highly recommend you do now. It’s quite worth the price of admission and I plan on seeing it again in theaters (which will be the first time I’ve done that voluntarily since Casino Royale’s release in 2006).

Read on, those who require further assurance or those who are merely curious as to what I thought in more detail.

More at:

http://nivenus.livejournal.com/12257.html

437. Satori - May 12, 2009

10 out of 10

Steve, (comment 435 above), he wasn’t promoted “straight from Cadet to Captain” he was promoted from Cadet to First Officer, then he finnegaled his way to Captain, so there is one more step in there, and although these promotions were quick, I had no problem with it.

As my rating reveals, I had no problem with any part of the film and I loved every minute and I wouldn’t change a thing. I heard Abrams say that they took Shatner’s scene out. I hope they put it into the “Deleted Scenes” portion of the DVD.

The new love triangle is hot.

I’m curious what other deviations there are from Star Trek Canon, if anyone (you, dear reader) knows them all and would like to enumerate them, I’ll be watching this conversational thread.

Winona Shoplifter is not that old. Why is she playing the mother of an adult Spock? Poor girl. (Remember her in DRACULA?)

I didn’t catch the tribble, so I’ll have to look for it on my next viewing.

I can’t wait for the sequel in this new sexier Star Trek Universe.

=)

438. Nivenus - May 12, 2009

Oops. Forgot to actually say what my rating was.

9.4

439. Florian Caspar - May 13, 2009

#430 Doug

ratings.. I think those numbers are sometimes not the best way to describe a movie… yet, you are right, they give a general impression…

to explain:
e.g. TRANSFORMERS… when I saw it, I was totally entertained by it, I liked the action, the speed, the chases, Megan Fox and such… :-) but…
(as with Spiderman and Ironman) I am very reluctant to compare this movie with a STAR TREK movie.

From TRANSFORMERS (or Spiderman or Ironman or The Spirit or anything like it) I expect one thing: Entertainment, Fun! If there is a clever thought inbetween the excitement, that makes be happy. But that is not a necessity.

From a STAR TREK movie I want more than that: I want a metaphor, a message, an allegory.. something that lifts the story above and beyond mere entertainining fast paced action cues. And that is a necessity.

The current ST movie is entertaining and fun and fast paced and uplifting …
but it IS NOT metaphorical, bold nor are there roots beneath the mere basic plot. (which is a bit thin here and there anyhow).

So, to answer your question (and I know I cheat a bit, like Orci/Kurtzman with the “alternate timeline” trick):
TRANSFORMERS and SPIDERMAN 2
as action/adventure movies: 7/10 , generally 5/10
IRON MAN
as action/adventure movie: 6/10, generally 4/10
STAR TREK
as action/adventure movie: 8/10, generally 7/10
(hei, I am a Trekkie!)

440. Doug L. - May 13, 2009

re 439 Florian,

Well, I agree with you on your Star Trek points. However, all the 9 out of 10’s and 10 out 10’s for Star Trek, I don’t fairly think are deserved.

Being Entertained is not my only criteria for a movie, it’s also being moved or being informed, and not wasting my time. Like you, I brought very high hopes to this movie, or at least brought a higher expectation to what I am looking for from a “Trek” movie. Like another poster in this thread, Star Trek really informed my thinking as a child, teaching tolerance, creative thought, teamwork, curiousity about life and what’s out there, etc.

While I really want this movie to do well (and it is) I think “Generally” speaking as a movie… it has too many holes and coincidences, and a lack of real development to derserve the credit it’s getting. I expect after everyone gets past the euphoria of seeing their favorite characters young again, or how cute Chris Pine is, (as my wife says), or having seen Old Spock one last time, people may take another look at this movie more objectively.

As far as the big picture goes, I like JJ Abrams method behind rebooting the franchise, have no problem with the actors, and think there are some good stories yet to be told.

I’m a Trekkie too. Doug L.

441. Florian Caspar - May 13, 2009

#440

Doug… I agree with you on all you have said..
this movie certainly is no 9/10, not even close,
but I am also happy, that it exists, it does well and it keeps the franchise alive….
and I think we agree, that a next movie needs to come up with better answers to all our need for curiosity and wonder and creativity and tolerance… and a bit of metaphor..

:-) cheers

442. Florian Caspar - May 13, 2009

and one confession: I liked NEMESIS ;-)
so don’t take my opinions too seriously :-)
cheers

443. Tbone - May 13, 2009

So William Shatner is in this movie afterall, it makes the alternate reality premise real.

444. Jefferies Tuber - May 13, 2009

Bob Orci:

Don’t skip straight to Khan in the next movie. It’s a bad call. We just had a movie centered on a madman. Granted, it wouldn’t be a revenge pic about a dead wife, because that hasn’t happened. But we need a solid “new life, new civilizations” episode.

I vote for an enormous remake of DAY OF THE DOVE. Klingons and Starfleet, jockeying for a planet and its people. Or something like it. ‘DOVE’ was just a crappy backlot episode, but it should have been the ultimate Klingon episode.

445. Dennis Sisterson - May 13, 2009

Hmmmm.
Well, I went into this film accepting that, to turn a buck, it had to appeal to a young popcorn crowd who think Star Wars is the best thing ever because it has Han Solo and lots of things blowing up in space and who think Star Trek is uncool because it’s slow or preachy or whatever.
So:
On the very first shot of the Kelvin, I liked the ping-ping bridge noises … made me feel at home right away. But did we have to crash-bang into the action within SECONDS? Surely we might have been a little more moved by these characters’ fates with just a few more moments’ introduction to them. I don’t buy that the popcorn crowd don’t care about this type of thing. If you don’t care about the character in the action scene, it compromises the excitement of the action.
Kid KIrk wrecking the car: Well – ok. But are we REALLY going to still have that Nokia ringtone over 200 years from now? Or even Nokia? Well- perhaps it’s there because it’s an antique, like the car. Jarring nonetheless. And don’t get me started on heavy metal.. but that’s just me.
I like all the actors in these parts; I didn’t mind that Chekov was suddenly a teenage genius when he was never an academic type before. If he was going to be in the film he had to be shoehorned in somehow. It wouldn’t have bothered me if he hadn’t been there, though.
I didn’t mind the so-called “iBridge”, I loved that the viewscreen WAS finally a window and not a big flatscreen telly, and I didn’t even mind the “industrial” parts of the ship… I understand they used real location for these as a money-saving measure, but a big powerful starship, dammit, ought to have an industrial-looking engine room. It always seemed to me that the engine rooms in previous versions were just lounges with control panels that were linked to the REAL engine room – there weren’t any actual engines in there. Right approach, but actual sets would be good next time.
Spock/Uhura romance.. I liked it, though they were a bit too chummy on the transporter pad…couldn’t quite buy Spock doing that so openly… nor couls I quite accept his sudden turnaround towards Kirk… I thought he needed a bit more reason for this cocky upstart to suddenbly be his friend “Jim”.
And I know they had a lot of ground to cover in this film, but a bunch of raw cadets are simply handed the fleet’s shiny new flagship, even if they did save the world? Nope. One of Trek’s strengths used to be its plausiblity. Its original creators had served in the forces and transposed that world into a sci-fi situation. It worked because it drew on reality. A serious weakness of this film was that it lacked credibility. you can’t throw that out of the window just because it’s sci-fi.. if anything, you have to work at it harder. Even Star Wars understood this – it worked because the universe it existed in was gritty and dirty and full of cruddy mundanity in the midst of all the space battles. This isn’t to say that Star Trek should be grubby in the same way, but it does need to achieve that same credibilty for you to care about it and believe in it. In the original series, they did this by having credible characters that made small talk and bitched at each other – in this respect, the new movie succeeds well enough, when there’s time for it – and also by making the setting work as if it was real, and this is where the new Star Trek falls down by having the cadets get the shiny new ship. Are ALL the senior officers in the fleet dead..?!?
All it would have taken was to pick up the story just a few years later, rather than at the end of the academy days… as if they’ve seen a few years’ service already. We wouldn’t have got the Kobayashi Maru scene, but it would have been PLAUSIBLE.
Now then. Here’s my hope for the next film: Can we please NOT have any time travel for, oh, the next ten or fifteen years at least? All time travel stories are much the same and it’s worn very thin. OK – we needed it in this film to have the non-rebooted reboot thing, but let’s leave it alone for a bit now.
Instead, call me a rebel but let’s break with the previous films and do one or more of the following:
-Explore strange new worlds
-seek out new life and new civilizations
-boldly go where no man – no-one, if you prefer – has gone before.
In other words, let’s do what it was all supposed to be about in the first place! No vengeful villains, no diplomatic crises, no “only ship in the quadrant”. Let’s have a story where the Enterprise is OUT THERE EXPLORING, encounters something mysterious which turns out to be threatening, and they have to figure it out before it destroys them. Let’s have some proper SCIENCE FICTION ideas here. Perhaps some aliens that are REALLY alien and not just masks and knobbly foreheads – and not just in the way they look but in the way they behave. Let’s get some real science fiction writers involved, people who know about ideas rather than technobabble. It doesn’t have to be about (yawn) tolerance, it doesn’t have to be too intellectual for the popcorn crowd – Classic Trek never was, after all, but still had some neat ideas – and it doesn’t have to plod along till we find V’Ger at the end and it doesn’t have to forego the action. Let’s just have some new ideas here – some genuine IMAGINATION. After all, despite all we hear about characters and moral messages, isn’t that what really grabbed us in the first place?

446. sean - May 13, 2009

With regard to Kirk’s quick ascension in the ranks, one might remember that Prime Kirk was a Lt before leaving the Academy (much like Saavik). So he clearly could have been here as well. Thus Lt – Capt. Still a bit daft, but maybe less so.

447. Doe - May 13, 2009

As a ST:TOS fan I was disappointed. Too many changes.
Yes I agree that the movie was entertaining and at times funny. The special effects were outstanding. The new time line established means that all that took place in the old time line is now gone. Think of the time paradox problems that now exsist. All those people that were saved will now die? The paradox’s are endless. So the bottom line is that the movie went to far, way to far for this old ST:TOS fan. If any thing good can be taken is that the movie will draw in (if you excuse the pun) a ‘new generation’ of younger Trek fans but for us old fans the movie SUCKED! There I said it. It SUCKED!

448. Holo J - May 13, 2009

(Just adding to my initial thoughts)

Did the changes in the timeline change the phasers into something else?
Bring back the phasers in the next one please, not the Star Wars type laser gun fire!

While I was watching Kirk and Spock fighting it out near the end on Nero’s ship it just felt wrong.

The effects in the movie were generally very good, top notch in fact. I didnt expect any less from Industrial Light & Magic. Although I really didn’t like the Star Wars type Light Speed effect instead of going with a modern twist to at least one of the warp effects we have seen in Star Trek before.

As it looks very likely this timeline will continue on screen I hope they can bring back more of a feel of Star Trek and less Star Wars with these things.

(Back to the Storyline).

I know the majority of the posters on here are fine with the timeline getting wiped. I can’t help feel it’s a bit of a FU to the long time fans. I understand why it has been done to keep the future unknown and allow non fans in with ease, but I think they could have done that with smaller scale changes so the others series still happened later on after the timeline “healed itself” because right now it needs some pretty big healing!

Even though I knew these big changes were happening, I don’t mind saying as a long time fan I am currently hurting from this pain. I am hoping that maybe in the next movie the writers will mention on screen for the people like myself that the other reality still exists just to ease the pain.

449. ZtoA - May 13, 2009

I say they do a remake of “Ultimate Computer” for the next movie. The E could get infected with a Cyberdyne-like computer virus turning the ship into the ultimate Terminator – laying waste to unsuspecting starfleet vessels, outposts and redshirt crewmen.

They, of course, would have to cast Samuel L. Jackson as Daystrom. Arlee Earl would be an interesting Commodore Wesley. I would cast either Mary McDonnel, George Takei, Judy Dench or Liam Neeson as the voice of M5.

450. RetroWarbird - May 13, 2009

I just saw Star Trek a second time, and actually will admit my opinion of it has changed, and so I feel my review must reflect that, so I submit a second review.

8.5/10.

I absolutely accept the new continuity. And the “Threat from the Future” contrivance matches up with the “Help from the Future” in the form of Spock’s knowledge. Plus there’s the knowledge that although Spock failed in Reunification and caused this parallel timeline, the Prime Universe still remains just fine.

The second viewing afforded me the opportunity to watch the nuance of the performances without getting sidetracked by the plot (which I still believe is too briskly paced and lacking expository dialogue but is satisfactory, and openly and unapologetically says “REBOOT” even if it’s got a built-in continuity rationale for it.

This was most assuredly a Space Western, and as that I appreciate the action. A little too frantic for me to absolutely adore, but loaded with enough

I’ll also say that the way it seemed like they could just Warp from here to Vulcan in five minutes is not true. Much in the same way they would quickly cut from Spock leaving Engineering or Transporter Room 1 directly to him walking onto the Bridge, the Warp instances were just editing too quickly. There is potentially day long pause between say, McCoy sedating Kirk and Chekov announcing arrival at Vulcan (of which Kirk wakes up). In between we even see McCoy has changed from Academy Uniform to Science Officer Uniform.

Spock is already a Commander, and just because he was on Earth to challenge Kirk’s cheat on the Kobayashi Maru doesn’t mean he “works at Starfleet Academy” full-time, in fact I find it highly probable that he’s been working with Pike already, shaking down the new Enterprise before her Maiden Voyage this movie (which is ultimately ahead of schedule for emergency reasons). The Cage is not therefore negated, and in fact Doc Boyle and Number One and the other cast of The Cage could have been his old crew from his previous ship. (One way in which there is plenty to explore in this new timeline).

Pike clearly liked Kirk, so the combat promotion is actually within the realm of possibility – after all, favoritism does happen in the military as far as promotions, and at the time he had no First Officer. Beyond that Kirk’s jump to Captain at the end is both testament to his heroism within the story, and also falls into “Combat Promotion” categories. Combat Promotions can be pretty logic defying leaps in rank based on the situation at hand. As for “right out of the Academy”, admittedly it’s pretty brief, but at the same time, within the Academy Kirk was already specializing in Command Training (hence why he sat in the Captain’s Chair on the Kobayashi Maru test). He already had 75% of the training required to be a Starship Captain, could theoretically have done some training missions on the Republic and the Farragut for “on-the-job experience” and ultimately the powers that be, combined with Pike’s recommendation could have led to Starfleet Command considering his performance during the Vulcan crisis to be enough experience to warrant a command. It’s still uncannily lucky and really fast, but we all know Kirk was the youngest Starship Captain, so it doesn’t break all logic.

Gaila the Orion was priceless, especially allusions to the Orion woman’s lusty nature. I’m curious about her at Starfleet Academy – Orion is a neutral world, and one loaded with criminals at that. I can buy an Orion girl in Starfleet, but I’m curious about the implications. Could she be an informer? Just an honest girl trying to be more than an average slave girl? Etc … I hope to see the Orions more in the next films. And the Andorians especially (altered timeline could mean a lot more focus on Andorians than we’ve had, and their use in Enterprise was that show’s saving grace).

I’m still astonished by the destruction of Vulcan but I like the idea that it could lead to strange cultural dilemmas between the Federation and Romulans, reunification intrigue and colonization stories. And while Amanda Grayson’s death kills Journey to Babel and The Search for Spock (partially) his memory of her will make “alternate takes” on those stories possible. And I’d love to see alternate takes on those stories.

The second time around, I noticed a lot more comparisons between the coldly logical Vulcans and the sarcastic, hot-tempered Romulans, and not only that, noticed a few more expository moments that tell the audience these races are the same species, different subgroups. I look forward to more ambiguous, political Romulan Empire cameos in the future (think Ambassador Nanclus – that guy was the epitome of Romulan intrigue). I especially liked the bit about Uhura knowing Romulan, and I imagine that “first sighting” of the Romulans occurred earlier because of these Romulan marauders.

There are plenty of blanks which can be filled in. I’d have appreciated it happening here (even if it felt cluttered) but if they spread it out, that’s fine as well. However, some things definitely needed to be expounded upon, and the cut-scenes really need to be reintegrated on the DVD.

Spock’s birth will be a nice scene, for starters, and Nero on Rura Penthe is an absolute – it should not have been cut in the theatrical. First of all, the teaser of those updated D7 Battle Cruisers on the KM scenario was too much, and we didn’t get to see any Klingons. Secondly … most of Starfleet was engaged in the Laurentian System … and I got the feeling that it was with the Klingons. So while this is happening, there’s a major conflict with the Klingons going on and we barely get a mention? That needs to be fixed, whether here or in the sequel. More on that in a minute. The other thing I think especially needs more is Scotty. I don’t know if there’s a cut scene or anything, but I feel like not only could we have used a scene where Kirk sent him down to Engineering to do something, it would’ve been really cool. We get a little bit of that, when Chekov suggests he could boost the Warp Drive and Scotty comes up, in uniform and having shaved – but we could’ve used Kirk, once he took command, telling Scotty “Well, our Chief Engineer died on Vulcan and you’re a pro, get yourself in a uniform and you can actually get a chance to “get your hands on those ample nacelles”, tying back to Scott’s affinity for the Enterprise mentioned on Delta Vega.

Now, as for sequels … they’ve talked about the new status quo meaning some old characters could come back, and I’ve seen plenty of talk about Khan, the Gorn Captain, etc …

But for my money? I think the next movie needs Klingons, and LOTS of ‘em – whether it be Kang, Kor, or Koloth (one of them is an ABSOLUTE MUST). And also, I really, really think, especially considering the Destruction of Vulcan, Sarek being a widower, and the fact that the Romulan Star Empire’s relationship with the Federation hasn’t actually changed – we have a historic opportunity to redo Sybok. Instead of a fruit-loop cult leader … have him be a fanatical Reunification preacher, demanding that the 10,000+ surviving Vulcans abandon the Federation and rejoin their Romulan brothers.

451. C.S. Lewis - May 13, 2009

What can one say that was not said already? A few things.

1. Dual band amateur radio antennas on the bridge of USS Kelvin seemed a bit odd. I actually have a Diamond model SG7500 mounted on my Touareg, but I don’t know what it would do on a ship’s bridge apart from poke someone’s eye. http://www.universal-radio.com/CATALOG/hamantm/2366.html

2. I love the .45 caliber Phasers. They make a wonderful ricochet but one is left to wonder why the venerable Model 1911 was not good enough. With a standard-issue lanyard, a shooter would not lose it, at least!

3. Far too many fat, middle-aged “fans” (of all genderal persuasions) made far too many socially inappropriate cackles and guffaws at utterly wrong moments. One might think they attempted to show their anticipation of an especially important moment by ruining it for everyone else by spitting snot from their noses. No wonder the producers did not want them as part of this movie; I agree.

4. Bob Orci, I will not ask for a refund. While it was too cacophonous to take in all at once, it did keep my attention until the final riff of Alexander Courage’s Star Trek theme song.

(Parenthetically, the theme was not well served coming from out of the blue as it did. Your composer might have bothered with an interlude to change musical gears, a transmission synchronizer as it were to match the typical Hollywood music to Courage’s Big Band era beauty. It rather reminded me of the pit orchestra at the Academy Awards, and the too-fast schlocky theme music they pound out for each winner. Pity.)

In all, it was as an entertaining a World War II propaganda movie as I’ve seen, and that says something. I’m not entirely certain it was Star Trek. Maybe Abrams/Orci can do the Battle of Midway or the Island Hopping campaign. I truly believe they have the technical skills to do justice to them all and they can use existing relics from the war as sets – no need to recreate the look.

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis

452. 'Trick - May 13, 2009

I wrote some stuff on some other topic pages about my initial reaction being an amalgamation of emotions, one of which was slight disappointment. I loved the characters and the script, however, the story was lacking a bit in a couple of departments (plausibility being the most obvious) and I thought the pacing was rushed. I also had a few nerd moments in which I thought “I don’t buy that.” The most pronounced of these moments was during the scene in engineering. There is no reason there should be brewery tanks patched with duct tape, or wear and tear of valves, or a corrugated metal ceiling on a brand new flagship. Maybe it wasn’t 100% complete? I tend to think they added that scene on for humor, but realized they had already reached the end of their budget. That’s fine, it’s not like other star treks have been 100% on quality control (but they didn’t have a $150 million budget either). I did find that it took me out of the movie a moment.

However, I have come to like the movie a good deal and have recommended it to pretty much everyone in my general vicinity. Is it the best Star Trek movie ever? I’m afraid not. Is it up to all of the hype? Yes (once again star trek movies are usually better than the usual fare) and No. Is it entertaining and fun? Absolutely Yes.

As a movie (in comparison to most blockbusters): 9/10

As a Star Trek movie: 7/10

Average: 8

I’m looking forward to the sequel being a smaller, consistently good, plot-driven film with a little bit of a more consistent and Star Trek-like message. Please don’t lose the fun, though, or the excellent character moments.

-P

453. Nivenus - May 13, 2009

For those who think battlefield promotions explain Kirk’s ascendance… not really. It’s a practice called brevetting and it is explicitly temporary in nature.

That said, it’s a fairly minor nitpick and I enjoyed the movie overall.

454. Brian B. - May 13, 2009

I just got back from seeing the movie. Overall, I liked it. A few plot points bugged me, but so much was good to great that I overlooked them. Only one niggle that I can’t shake. Kirk, McCoy, and QunitoSpock and later Scotty all have impossible costume changes. And if Kirk is a captain at the end of the film, why is he wearing a cadet uniform. I think they could have figured out how to make that work, but oh well.

455. RetroWarbird - May 13, 2009

453 … I suppose he could be Bvt. Capt. James T. Kirk, then … after all, he’s in relief of Pike … but possibly just while Pike’s disabled.

It’ll come full circle if say, Pike in a wheelchair recuperating is actually foreshadowing what happens to him in the next one, and he sure enough gets massive burns rescuing trainees from some sort of emergency, and he’s unable to ever command again, thereby Kirk (now having commanded the Enterprise “temporarily” for Pike and having required experience) gets a full Command title and pay grade.

Or else Starfleet’s half-military/half-academic make, since it’s not a purely military organization, is a little looser in their Chain-of-Command and promotions than the modern U.S. Armed Forces are, which is pretty likely as well.

456. Ponderer - May 13, 2009

HOW TO RESOLVE ST XI WITH CANON

I find it easiest to appreciate the movie by not by thinking about “timelines” (which I think are a red herring) but by considering the whole film (except the events in Spock’s mind-meld) as being set in a parallel universe. The Jellyfish and the Narada are thrown into this by the black hole in the prime universe in much the same way as the USS Defiant was thrown into the “mirror” parallel universe (and which also had a huge impact on the future development of that universe). ENT’s “Thru a Mirror Darkly” also provides a precedent for how parallel universes need not be running in synch with each other time-wise. There a ship from 2268 – the Defiant – emerges in around 2155 by the Mirror Universe’s calendar.

So here we have a different universe that is initially quite congruent to the separately-existing “prime” one, (at least as of the early 23rd Century), but with a few little differences. (The Kirks are serving on the USS Kelvin while expecting their baby instead of on Earth, Starship design is slightly different, The uniforms are a bit odd, Engine rooms are messier, etc. Just enough to make it noticably a bit off ) The arrival of the Narada throws this universe way off track from running “parallel” to ours. This continues over the next 25 years as more and more of pre-TOS history does not track, culminating with the disaster Nero wreaks with his low-tech Death Star, which risks spinning this universe completely off in a different direction that is no longer recognisable as related to the prime one.

But the second half of the film changes things because for the first time in this parallel universe the TOS crew starts to assemble in their familiar roles and – crucially – James T. Kirk takes command of the Enterprise. That’s the turning point. Up till then everything was been getting worse and worse and the people in charge had been making bad calls. But from that moment on, the parallel universe starts getting sorted out and begins moving back towards the historical track of the prime one.

By the end of the movie, the message is that although this universe seemed so screwed up mid-film that its future was bound to be very bleak, now that the Enterprise crew are all in position a corner has been turned. That Kirk and the NCC-1701 crew are somehow destined to come together in all universes and once they do, good things can start to happen again and humanity can climb higher.

Strikes me as comforting thought in a world like ours that can seem so bloody it appears even less parallel to the prime universe!

457. sean - May 13, 2009

#454

Huh? He is wearing a Capt’s uniform at the end. What impossible costume changes are you referring to?

458. Lt. Cmdr. Findley NCC-1706 - May 13, 2009

Where to start

I went to see the new Trek on May 7. I entered the theater with hopeful anticipation and skepticism. I hoped they wouldn’t deviate too far from Trek-lore, but was skeptical that a non-Trek writing (except Orci) could produce a great movie with all of the aspects all Trek-fans love about Trek. It seems for the past few years Paramount has given the fans little consideration. First Enterprise and now New-Trek.

It’s kind-of like New Coke from the 80’s. There’s someone out there who remembers what I mean. Coca Cola wanted to revamp their taste and formula that had held the test of time. Everyone tried it at first but after their initial taste Coke fans rejected the new formula. I wish these companies would stop trying to change what has worked over the years simply to whore out what many of us have enjoyed most of our lives.

I do realize it is just a movie. I understand it is fiction and about fictional characters. What if a Harlequin Romance novelist began writing Louis L’amour western novels? Would they care about the same things Louis cared about?

I have read and heard several interviews with Gene Roddenberry. His vision of the future and the reasons he developed stories how he did; the purpose driven story telling. The deep characters; as someone put it, it is the cerebral aspect of Star Trek. This is what we love and this is one of the many things we missed in this movie. The fact that this is a movie and not a television series is no excuse because the writers of the previous movies managed it. Even Shatner in ST-V.

I’m sorry but is is a hard pill to swallow when people who have no vested interest in Star Trek begin making Ohura and Spock have a romance, Kill all but a handful of Vulcans, make the Enterprise look too different, add Star Wars plot aspects and character schemes.

All of the negative aspects of the movie wouldn’t matter so much except that the person in the captain’s seat (as it were) does not care about Trek, its history, its stories, its fans, or its integrity. He is a self professed Star Wars fan and admitted to adding Star Wars aspects to Star Trek as he felt Star Trek was lacking in these areas.

459. Lt. Cmdr. Findley NCC-1706 - May 13, 2009

Review Rating

Characters 8/10
Story 5/10
Ship 7/10

460. ZtoA - May 13, 2009

I need to change my “Ultimate Computer” movie idea a bit (see thread 449). Instead of the M5 being on the E… it needs to be on another Constellation Class ship… the E would be part of the war-game armada along with the Lexington & Excalibur. We all know what ensues next, but the Enterprise survives the war-game encounter. Kirk’s mission is to destroy the pyscho starship before it starts a war with the klingons and/or the romulans.

The M5 would be programed with all the phobias of Daystrom and all the tactical skills of Pike – both of whom would be on board. Plus it would have the ability to infect other star ships computer systems and turn them into Daystrom-Pike killing machines. One very cold scene would be how one of the ships in the psycho fleet opens it’s hanger bay doors and systematically routes the escaping air so that all the crew are sucked out of the back of the ship.

Since Trek reality is now altered, Pike could die while sabotaging his ship moments before the E and the Kingons/Romulans destroy it and the armada it created.

Think of it as Wrath Of Kahn meets Virus.

There… that’s much better…

461. SChaos1701 - May 13, 2009

458

“All of the negative aspects of the movie wouldn’t matter so much except that the person in the captain’s seat (as it were) does not care about Trek, its history, its stories, its fans, or its integrity. He is a self professed Star Wars fan and admitted to adding Star Wars aspects to Star Trek as he felt Star Trek was lacking in these areas.”

WRONG!!!!

462. Brian B. - May 13, 2009

#457.

I was referring to when Kirk got his medal at Starfleet Academy.

What I noticed:

a. When McCoy puts Kirk on the shuttle to Enterprise, Kirk is in red. After arriving on Enterprise. McCoy places Kirk on a biobed in Sickbay. Kirk is wearing black.

b. Spock leaves on the shuttle in black and arrives on Enterprise with the blue top.

c. McCoy is in red in Sickbay one moment and the next he has his blue top on.

d. Scotty comes aboard Enterprise with the cold weather gear and is wet. Next we see is that he is in his red top wiping water out of his ear.

Each of these are not split second changes, but the implied ammount of time that passes precludes the opportunity to have changed clothes.

It’s a small matter and I enjoyed the movie, but it stuck out for some reason.

463. ZtoA - May 13, 2009

462 and/or 457

Had this been a TV episode, commercial breaks would have occured during the observed breaks in continuity. In the movie, McCoy does tell Kirk that he needs to change his clothes. Also, we know that there are bathrooms on some shuttles because McCoy wanted to hide in one when departing from Riverside. So a change of clothes is at least feasible while in transit to the E.

The Scotty change… now that was quick. They needed a commercial break there… LOL.

464. Doc Rice - May 13, 2009

I’ve seen the movie 6 times so far, 5 of them in IMAX (Dublin, CA), which is once a day since it officially came out on Thursday night. I’ve seen the movie like clockwork every 24 hours, in almost the same exact seat each time (I usually get to the theater about a couple of hours ahead of time, even if I’m the only one in line for the first hour). As someone who grew up watching ST since I was born in the ’70s, I was quite excited but skeptical when plans for a new movie with a new cast was announced years ago.

My take: 8/10. Good, but not everything I was hoping for. I’ve always enjoyed the darker Treks a bit more like TUC (which means I was slightly partial to Nemesis as well, which puts me in a tiny minority) and never cared for the cheese-ball inserts that removed the realism in TOS and TNG, but that’s natural Trek so I’ll deal with it. Reading Countdown helped, but didn’t spoil anything.

I can see why some would complain that this isn’t traditional Trek. This movie had to bring the crew together in a single movie, explain the crew background with focus on the primary two characters, justify the reboot via alternate reality, and please both hardcore Trek and mainstream audiences. JJ and crew had to set this all up within two hours to lay the foundation for future films, so there’s bound to be tradeoffs. I’m happy overall with the balance they created, and I’m pretty sure they knew it couldn’t be perfect for everyone.

That said, I have some personal opinions, comments, and nitpicks (in no particular order):

– Scotty refers to “miles” when talking about transporting a grapefruit, while the metric system was referenced during the space jump. Of course, TOS used both measurement systems as well, depending on episode, so this inconsistency can be considered consistent with canon.

– The Vulcan Science minister tells Spock, “Logical, but unnecessary” when referring to his choice to also apply to Starfleet. Later, Sarek tells Spock, “What is necessary is always logical.” Kind of a nice ying-yang.

– In the Spock and Spock Prime scene, some of the tight shots of Spock Prime are out of focus. I somewhat doubt this was an aesthetic choice.

– I prefer that weapons, such as hand phasers, have a more utilitarian look (read: charcoal-colored or something). Otherwise, it glimmers and is easily noticeable by enemies. I doubt US military soldiers carry hard-chromed pistols in their holsters which make easy targets for the other side. Also, why would shooting a phaser produce “recoil?” Of course, having such an effect makes it appear that the energy bursts produced are strong enough to create kickback.

– Only one drop of red matter is needed to take care of the supernova in the 24th century. Why was the Jellyfish carrying a lifetime supply of this stuff? It looks like an immense exercise ball from the gym.

– If I were Pike, I would’ve fired on the drilling rig’s chain over Vulcan and got out of weapons range pronto.

– Is Delta Vega so close to Vulcan that Spock Prime could witness its destruction like he was watching a movie? Or does the sky of Delta Vega have an IMAX screen with a transmission from the Narada tied in?

– Spock Prime being marooned on Delta Vega just around the same time Kirk is ejected to the planet. And a starbase is nearby. With Scotty hanging around. Very convenient timing, don’t you think? Or is this another example of “having faith” that the universe will unfold, as it should (as mentioned by Spock in Undiscovered Country)? I’ll let this slide since the movie had to accomplish a ton within 2 hours, but the believability still escapes me a bit here.

– Where did Spock get the comfortable fur-lined jacket to wear on Delta Vega? Did he happen to pack it aboard his ship? Was a Narada crew member nice enough to provide it for him?

– Overall, I like the Enterprise redesign. My favorite is always the TOS movie versions (ST TMP – TUC), so the saucer is great, I like how the bottom arc of the secondary hull sweeps forward more and extends the deflector dish farther out … but the front of the nacelles above the bussard collectors have to go.

– Music was excellent, but the main theme still hasn’t grown on me. That said, I was never a big fan of Alexander Courage’s theme, nor Jerry Goldsmith’s. I was more into James Horner’s version.

– One of the Vulcan Council members (I believed played by Anna Katarina) seemed a bit too smiley for a Vulcan as she stood up.

– Admiral James Komak is sitting right next to Admiral Richard Barnett at Starfleet Academy when Kirk and Spock are debating the merits of the Kobayashi Maru. Discreet, but nice touch.

– The Enterprise phaser and photon torpedo sounds are a little too “space cheesy” as if from some old video game with the generous reverb. I prefer the torpedo launch sounds from ST I, II, III, or VI as they sound more “real” to me.

– The phaser type II changing from stun to kill pivots that barrel (blue to red). Nice idea. No more of that “turn the dial up to vaporize.” But if you’re conserving ship’s power and need to zap with something to heat coffee, or if you’re stranded on a cold planet and need to heat up some rocks, how would this be accomplished?

– Kelvin meets Narada. Best. Opening. Scene. Ever.

– The lobster monster was scared of Spock’s little flame-on-a-stick? If a tiny guy waved a match at me, I wouldn’t freak out. I guess lower(?) life forms on frozen planets are really sensitive.

– I like how they recycled some of the old TOS bridge sounds and mixed them with new ones to create a nice complement. Also, it’s easy to miss the sickbay’s heart pulse sound in the background since the scenes are so hectic.

– The Kelvin had 800 crew members and the TOS Enterprise had 430? How many did the new Enterprise have? But the movie does show the real-life massiveness of these ships now, something accentuated through a large IMAX screen. It’s good to finally have that “enormous like a star destroyer” feel. Very evident as the Enterprise detaches from space dock.

– I like the slight usage of Alexander Courage’s theme as the shuttle transporting Kirk and McCoy takes off to Starfleet Academy.

– As Kirk rides his bike to go to Starfleet recruiting (after looking at the ship construction from a distance), we see “Sector 47″ on one of the signs. Maybe intentionally placed by JJ.

– Hardly anyone designs seat belts in the future. Even for the Jellyfish.

– After Spock beamed back from Vulcan as it was being destroyed, he had dirt on the side of his face. I don’t recall seeing said dirt before beam-up.

– Spock was sitting down while running the Jellyfish on a collision course to the Narada. After he was beamed out, he was standing up. A little inconsistent, but I guess it could be argued that he stood up as the beam took him (which occurs off-camera). Unlike in TOS, when you get caught in the transporter beam, you don’t “freeze” in place.

– In one of the trailers, Spock says, “You will experience fear … fear in the face of certain death.” In the actual movie, he says, “The purpose of the test is to experience fear…” Was the voiceover dialog re-recorded for the trailer? It’s also a little different between trailer and movie in the way the line is spoken by “Officer 294″ when asking little Jim Kirk his name.

– The Narada is a Romulan ship with state-of-the-art retrofitted Borg tech. Nero could’ve used the cloaking device every now and then just for kicks. Oh, is Spock about to ram you? Well then, engage the cloak and just step aside. Also, does the Narada lack a deflector beam to hold the Jellyfish in place if there’s a collision course involved? You figure a ship the size of the Narada could swat Spock’s ship off-course like a fly.

– Kirk and Spock doing combat at the end with the enemy gets a bit old after watching the movie a few times. Good guy and bad guy finally meet in a dirty, gritty place for the man-to-man struggle. Feels like your typical Hollywood action movie. Gotta please the mainstream crowd, I guess.

– Does the Narada not have shields to prevent intruders from beaming aboard?

– I have to suspend reality in Kirk’s accelerated career. I’ll let this slide since the writers had to accomplish things for both fans and new audiences in short space, but it’s a really big stretch in my mind … I don’t care if he saved Earth.

– Lens flares didn’t bother me. I enjoyed the shaky camera (to me, it feels more real and “in-person”).

– The music sequence on the bridge where Kirk and Spock decide to infiltrate the Narada … just felt a bit corny to me.

– Bruce Greenwood as Pike was solid. Couldn’t be happier.

– Cho wasn’t as sharp as the Sulu we see in the early TOS, but again, we’re talking about a comparatively inexperienced crew before the TOS 5-year mission. I keep thinking there’s going to be a course plotted to White Castle.

– Kirk-fu has been improved.

– Spock’s mind-meld explanation was a bit off with Countdown. In the comic, there’s a bit of story after Romulus gets wiped out and Nero faces Spock with his newly-outfitted ship. But for the sake of the movie and the need to get it summed up quickly, I’ll let this slide.

– Maybe I missed this – how does Spock Prime know where to beam Kirk and Scotty? Does the starbase have the exact current locations of all Starfleet vessels?

– Still prefer the Enterprise nacelles to be a bit further apart.

– Towards the end, the Enterprise comes out of warp, weapons blazing, and takes out Narada’s torpedoes. That’s … very good anticipation before coming out of warp, ain’t it? Are sensors THAT good that you can prepare your targeting before dropping into sub-light? Or did they just blindly start firing not thinking there would be another friendly in the area?

– Would’ve preferred a bridge that was a little bit more industrial (like Kelvin’s). The iBridge is cool, but felt a bit out of place. The HUD viewscreen works for me.

– The TOS theme at the beginning of the ending credits feels forced in. I guess it made for a “fun” way to end the movie with homage to the original, but I don’t think it feels natural.

– Polar Lights Narada plastic model in same scale as Enterprise model. Want.

Trek has always lacked that little something in terms of physical realism aside from the underlying philosophies, etc.. I was hoping this would be the Trek I’ve been waiting for since I was born, and I did get a lot of what I wanted, but not all. I’m not the purist Trek fan since I don’t care for The Cage nor expect every episode to be a human-exploration story with Gene’s stamp on it. I’m one of those who prefers the more militaristic uniforms (like in TWOK onward) and The Doomsday Machine is still a top favorite of mine.

There’s always going to be true purists who cling onto the vision tooth and nail, and that’s respectable, but I don’t think it would’ve been realistic to get the true cerebral human-adventure story into a reboot movie bearing a name with its reputation in the mainstream while fulfilling the business need to re-awaken the franchise and bring in the contemporary crowd. For this reason, I’m going to cut JJ and crew slack because I interpret this movie as a jump-start to get this to into the general public’s acceptability mindframe with all the broad features that pleases everyone (action, effects, romance, etc.).

I’m very happy that the few aliens in the movie actually looked like aliens and not just human actors with a prosthetic on top of their foreheads (although alien languages without any universal translators would’ve been nice; Romulans of the future speak very good English). Using time travel (again) to explain the reboot is a bit of a cop-out, but hey, it’s better than Q getting pissed off somewhere and snapping his fingers to give humanity a shake-up again.

While I knew this movie would be diluted to gain traction with the mass audience, the elements of Trek that I related to are still there, so I’m quite happy. Will probably see at least a few more times before the IMAX screenings expire.

465. The Commodore - May 13, 2009

Well, the plot has holes you could pilot a Starship through, but it’s enjoyable, and much better than I thought it would be. Cadet to Captain though? Just ain’t gonna happen. Orci and Co should go read ‘Midshipman’s Hope’ by David Feintuch for a much more realistic take on what should have happened here.

It’s been said before, but Pine, Urban and Greenwood are superb. Quinto was good, the rest did okay with the material they were given.

The characters were… mainly right. Don’t like the Spock-Uhura romance, it don’t feel right and will likely affect the dynamic of the main trio in future films, especially as Spock’s suppression of his emotions was such a big part of that. And is it really okay for the communications officer to just wander away from her Bridge station to check that her boyfriend is alright? (Yeah, she did something similar in Star Trek V, but that isn’t the best film to be using as a precedent, guys)

Also not sure about Scotty, though that’s not down to Simon Pegg, it’s down to the way his character has been written. Next time you are writing lines for Scotty, people, PLEASE try to visualise James Doohan saying them – it was a stretch to imagine the original series’ Chief Engineer coming out with some of the stuff Simon Pegg was given to say. And for God’s sake get rid of the furry sidekick – it’s clearly there to be a comic foil and, as has already been pointed out by other reviewers, Scotty IS NOT A COMEDIAN.
Yes, he had a sense of humour – all the characters did – but Doohan’s Scott also had something that the new one so far lacks: Authority (with a capital ‘A’). I don’t see this Scott being able to get a crewman back to work with one glance, or taking command of the Enterprise, or facing down a Federation Ambassador (without so much as a smirk), or punching out Klingons in space station bars. Here’s hoping that was due to the lack of screen time to develop the character, and not to some juvenile desire to undermine the character and turn him a clown. (See above regarding use of Star Trek V as a precedent).

oh, and the Uglyprise is just awful, inside and out. Whatever happened to “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. Update, by all means, but why make changes for the sake of it? Let’s get back to the basic black with red trim on the Bridge – and let’s have Engineering looking like something that belongs in Space, rather than something that put to sea in the last century.

6 out of 10 for entertainment value, marks deducted for the above negative aspects.

I do hope these comments and reviews are read and inwardly digested by the film’s writers. They’re all posted by people who really care about Star Trek, and for the most part the ‘nitpicks’ look to be well meant. I know you can’t please everyone, but patterns are definitely emerging – maybe they should pick up on those for next time? Please?

466. sean - May 13, 2009

#462

I still don’t understand.

“I was referring to when Kirk got his medal at Starfleet Academy.”

They all wear those uniforms in that scene. I assume they’re cadet dress unis. He’s being promoted at the moment, so he isn’t yet capt and thus shouldn’t be wearing that uniform (besides that fact, the only person NOT wearing the formal wear is Pike, and even he isn’t wearing a duty uniform).

“a. When McCoy puts Kirk on the shuttle to Enterprise, Kirk is in red. After arriving on Enterprise. McCoy places Kirk on a biobed in Sickbay. Kirk is wearing black.”

The black is the undershirt. He merely took off the cadet dress jacket as he was clearly uncomfortable due to what McCoy injected him with (he gets flush and grabs at his collar).

“b. Spock leaves on the shuttle in black and arrives on Enterprise with the blue top.”

Actually, we never see Spock get on the shuttle. The next time we see him after his brief confab with Uhura is some time later aboard the Enterprise after McCoy & Kirk arrive, and it’s not unreasonable he’s merely changed his uniform into appropriate duty wear (being Spock and all). It takes me all of 10 seconds to change my shirt, and from what I could tell that’s all that Spock did.

“c. McCoy is in red in Sickbay one moment and the next he has his blue top on.”

Kirk is sedated and passes out between those moments, so it’s likely more time has passed than you think.

“d. Scotty comes aboard Enterprise with the cold weather gear and is wet. Next we see is that he is in his red top wiping water out of his ear.”

This is well after the confrontation on the bridge, so I don’t see an issue (Spock speaks to his father in the Transporter room in the meantime). Would you expect him to stand around in wet clothes? He dried off and got a uniform.

I’m not a crazy continuity defender or anything, I just don’t see how those uniform changes are ‘impossible’.

467. 16309A - May 14, 2009

Let me start by saying GREAT MOVIE! It was worth the wait!

I just can’t seem to get past the Spock/Uhura thing. It makes no sense to me. What about Spock’s pre-arranged marriage? Don’t tell me the timeline change got to that also–please!

Why is the Kelvin in the same style ship as the future ships. If it is from the original timeline it should look like a ship from TOS, right?

If either of those topics have been covered, I’m sorry!

How could they do that to Vulcan? Such an important planet in the world of Trek. That bum’s me out!! (Goodbye Tuvok!)

I give it 8 Live Long and Prospers out of 10

PS–JJ–I would be more then happy to purchase you a new stand to put the cameras on for the next movie.

468. the_law - May 14, 2009

This has been the film I’ve been waiting three years now to come out. After seeing some six times already, including once in IMAX, I can safely say it is a superb film. Mr. Abrams has a solid product for us Trek fans and Mr. Orci and Mr. Kurtzman did an outstanding job in writing this screenplay. Gentlemen, I’m ready for the next installment.

The acting was top notch, with kudos going to Mr. Pine and Mr. Quinto for their portrayal of Kirk and Spock respectively. Mr. Urban is spot on as Dr. McCoy and I thoroughly enjoyed Mr. Pegg’s Scotty. One of my favorite character for whom I was surprised I would be so impressed with was Captain Pike. Mr. Greenwood’s portrayal of the first Enterprise captain was amazing and he’s definitely a hero in the film. Without too much gushing, they all did a great job and Mr. Nimoy’s Spock was a welcome addition and much needed for this film to work for me.

The special effects are unbelievable. As I sit here writing this, I am remembering the scope and depth of the space scenes, battles and the detail of everything. A memorable scene is when we are introduced to the completed NCC-1701 at space dock. The score that went along with the scene gave you a sense of awe as we saw the scale of this new Federation Flagship.

The story was plausible and acceptable. After all the time travelling done in the Trek universe, there’s no reason we can’t have this story play out as it did to enable us to see new adventures of our favorite crew. The best part about “re-booting” this franchise (which is a term I have disdain for) is that it’s not really a “re-boot” in the sense that we’re starting new with no background (or future) stories. The structure of Star Trek is still there, but the look is different due to the incursion in the time line from Nero.

That leads me to the villian. Nero is a tragic character, torn by his rage and sadness and consumed by his thirst for vengeance. In some ways, he is the embodiment of all previous Trek villains and shows signs of each throughout the film. There was just a part of me that felt sorry for the guy and I think if you read the “Countdown” series, you’ll appreciate that.

What really hit most was the destruction of Vulcan. But its destruction puts a sense of reality to this fantasy world that some Trek productions lack. Trek is a place where bad things can and will happen…even on a super-9/11 scale. How our characters respond to such tragedies is what is worth watching and we saw that play out in the film. Never fear, the Vulcan people will endure.

The story went by really fast in that you don’t realize that two hours are up until the final credits roll. I like the fact that the traditional Star Trek opening was done at the end to symbolize that it may be the ending of this movie, but it’s the beginning of the adventure.

Overall…..as much as it may make me out to be some babbling fan boy, I’ll give this film a 10 out of 10….4 stars….two thumbs up….anything to convey my appreciation and admiration of this product.

As for a sequel….I personally cannot wait and am buzzing with curiosity as to where they’ll take us in the next film that hopefully will debut no later than 2012 (please?). I read in one of the sites listed in a TrekMovie article that the next film should do some serious character development and I tend to agree. I did think that McCoy needs to be included more so we get that dynamic trio of Kirk, Spock and McCoy which we really didn’t get in this film.

I don’t see why they couldn’t use the story line of a young Carol Marcus dating James T. Kirk and then leaving him to pursue some secret Starfleet Project with baby in tow (that in this reality Kirk is unaware of).

But, I’ll leave the story details to those who have done such a masterful job with the current movie…well done all!

469. RetroWarbird - May 14, 2009

I’m still holding out for Kang, Kor or Koloth in the next one … (with a keen need to see Sybok revisited as well).

Wait for Khan until Star Trek 13 … give us some Klingons first. And Andorians. We have to have Andorians in the next one.

470. sean - May 14, 2009

#469

“with a keen need to see Sybok revisited as well”

Don’t make me reach through this computer screen.

471. Jefferies Tuber - May 14, 2009

The TOS Engineering set was little more than a command terminal to some complicated off-screen works, so the griping on this site about the new set seems misplaced. Clearly one could not exist without the other.

It would be pretty bad ass to have Kirk visit Scotty in the Engineering room next time and find the large cavernous space left when Scotty replaced it all with a small machine in the corner. Aye, Cap’n!

472. VulcanNonibird - May 14, 2009

@469

No Sybok, please….

ST-V was a good movie till “explore our pain” – from that on it went helter-skelter downhill.

473. cagmar - May 14, 2009

“oh, and the Uglyprise is just awful, inside and out. Whatever happened to “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”? Update, by all means, but why make changes for the sake of it? Let’s get back to the basics”

Cheers, dude. Abrams’ design experiment is over. It failed. Now they need to bow out politely and give us back our Enterprise.

474. Doug L. - May 14, 2009

re 473…

While I agree with some of your sentiments, have some issues with the movie itself… and would love an Enterprise more closely resembling the original…

…the notion that this “expirement” failed is also coming from another reality. The movie is a critical and financial success.

Doug L.

475. cagmar - May 14, 2009

#467 16309A … you know what’ll really irk you? Is finding out that the shaky cam is not actually a result of no tripod. The camera is shaken in post-production. They would have filmed everything pretty steady and then shaken it until JJ said stop. Imagine that. He added every shake. Every shake is a mark of his personal pressures on the movie. None of it was by accident.

and #464 Doc Rice… the blurring of Nimoy, I really felt that was the projectionist trying to adjust the movie because he thought something was wrong. Now that I’ve heard others having the same experience, I guess I was wrong.

Instead, what you’ll probably find is that the blur of Nimoy is because they were using a slower shutter speed on the camera — as usually happens with low-light settings like caves or dark shuttle bays. They were probably so used to the blinding white of the bridge the director forgot to change up the shutter speed ? Dunno. my guess. I’m just glad it wasn’t the bewildered projectionist!

Now, you say you didn’t mind the camera flares, but they were added with CGI to correct for the sloppy bridge contrasts, and therefore they would have impacted Nimoy’s blurring… so maybe you did kind of dislike the flares a little ? I hated seeing Nimoy blurred.

476. cagmar - May 14, 2009

474 – Agreed! I said: “Abrams’ DESIGN experiment”. No, I totally agree with you otherwise. i think we’re on the same page.

477. Closettrekker - May 14, 2009

No one is going to “bow out” and go back to a past design for the Enterprise. It wasn’t an “experiment”. It was a quite confident creative decision.

The only thing likely to change is that they may actually build a set for engineering the next time around, since Abrams admitted lacking left-over funds to do so for ST09.

478. Blake - May 14, 2009

Let me start off by saying I’m a High School student who has seen every episode of every Season of every Star Trek Series, so there can be no one to accuse me of not being a ‘true fan’. I absolutely loved the movie. I believe J.J. Abrams presented a perfect representation of the ST universe which appealed to both my fan boy side, as well as the side of me which expects a heart pounding experience when I pay to sit in a Movie Theatre. They did not “throw me under the bus”, being a hardcore fan of the series. For those of you complaining fans who actually would have received what you’re suggesting, you would not think of seeing it twice. I’m planning on seeing it many times over, however long a ride my low budget will give me. Because it is that; a ride. One which is both exhilarating and interesting.

I personally believe that Abrams appealed to the fans TREMENDOUSLY. Okay, the action sequences are prettier to look at, Hell, you can’t rip your eyes away. Okay, some ideas are a little far fetched, well, I’m telling you right now that THAT is the ESSENCE of Star Trek. I believe that someone was complaining about Kirk being promoted so quickly; you obviously did not follow the theme of the film… I am privileged to have been heavily exposed to film analysis in both my Theatre and English classes. I have seen every major production from Rebel Without a Cause to No Country for Old Men, and have written heavily on them. Movies are basically my pastime, and Star Trek, was the best movie of the year so far.

Again, I too, am a die-hard Star Trek fan. Though this is a case where the phrase ‘change is good’ REALLY means something. The direction they took with Kirk was ingenious; a lone rebel who awaits something which should prove challenging. McCoy was SPOT ON from the old series. As was Scotty (actor was absolutely brilliant). Chekov was stupendous. O’hura was fresh and played into the basest emotional questions we asked throughout the original series. The inclusion of Pike was also ingenious. Sure they took some liberties, but you must understand there were limitations in the 40s which make no sense to carry on today. For example, Star Trek shocked the world with the first ever inter-racial television kiss… All Abrams did was carry the edginess into the 21st century, only now the shock factor comes in a package which is too updated for most Star Trek fans.

Here is a news report explaining the changes Abrams made to the franchise:

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/trekkies_bash_new_star_trek_film

479. Doc Rice - May 14, 2009

#475 cagmar :

A slower shutter speed is compensated by aperture in respect to lighting level and also affects depth-of-field. However, I think it’s just sloppy focusing since the shots of Quinto directly opposite of Nimoy was fine.

I think I’ll see this movie again tonight. That makes it my seventh time, which means after tonight I would’ve spent over $100 on tickets alone (including Fandango service charges). For some reason, this movie isn’t getting old yet. At this point there are a few parts where I feel like, “Yeah, yeah… Ok…” but overall I’m still gratified after the final credits end. This film has really good replay value because there’s so much packed into it.

However, I’m really tired of seeing the same trailers as well as the looped Transformers / Potter / Trek / Museum trailers outside the theater on the TV.

480. Mark - May 14, 2009

I thought it was a great movie. Look forward to the next one in 2011

481. Nomad - May 14, 2009

478:
“some ideas are a little far fetched, well, I’m telling you right now that THAT is the ESSENCE of Star Trek”….

Not exactly. The original series maintained its credibility in the midst of fantastic situations by carefully constructing a credible world, based on extrapolating from our own. They did a lot of homework to make sure the science was plausible and only departed from that when they really had to, as in the case of warp drive and transporters. This is why it still stands up today and why this film was made at all. It’s only by contructing such a careful, credible world that an intelligent adult viewer can care about the characters and still believe in them when they face mischievous demigods or silicon rock monsters. When you start to give command of shiny new flagships to cocky cadets, you lose that credibility and are left with a vacuous popcorn movie just like a thousand others.

And someone should let you know that when the reporter in that Onion video talks about Star Trek having been created “in the 40s or something”, it’s a joke. ;-)

482. Stephen - May 14, 2009

I loved the movie.

The one issue I was thinking about is the alternate timeline now. I know the writers are saying that both timelines co-exist, but Spock prime and Nero went back in time along the same timeline, so it really is not an alternate timeline, it’s a timeline with the future we know being collapsed, and now a new one is being written. So I was thinking, so many episodes, movies, etc. always placed a great emphasis on putting things back in place to restore the timeline. I know the jelly fish is destroyed now, but spock prime has his equations for time warp and he could go back to when he and Nero first meet and prevent the time travel from occuring in the first place.

483. Eli - May 15, 2009

One of the biggest nitpics I’ve heard regarding the movie was the plot. Well just tell me to shut up if it sound too repetitive, but now that the balance of the major races has thrown amuck at the end of the film, and Enterprise crew and most likely their superiors know the fates of the larger powers what’s going to happen to them in the new 150 years beyond the changes Nero made, and nowing how good they are at wriing movies, there’s no limit to what the “Supreme court” could come up. I Could see the writers coming up with a great way to make a multi-feature saga that sends our crew out on missions of highly classified importance and full of moral questions of if and what they’re doing is right even if they could prevent the losses of millions of lives by preventing the explosion at Kronos Mining Moon, or, the prevention of the supernova that eventually destroys Romulus. And this adds in the conflict, how do you try to reunite your vulcan refugees with their romulan bretheren when we’re at war with them.

Also war with the Klingongs heats up pretty quick and I’m sure they’d take a quiet listen to our concernes that their highest production facility is gonna explode right smack dab of hostilities!

Then, don’t dorget that the Rommies and the klingons form a secret alliance of ther own during TOS and it all ready looks like a fun few years for our fine young crew coming up.

Can’t hardy wait!

P.S.
Just put a real frickin warp core in the Enterprise by then!

484. Doc Rice - May 15, 2009

Just got back from my seventh viewing. I have to say that the Narada’s ending disappoints me a bit. The Narada is a nice, big, creepy-looking ship that makes the Scimitar look like a mosquito compared to an enormous octopus-with-razors. It easily beat the crap out of the Kelvin. The 4 or 5 ships that took off to Vulcan first ended up becoming minced hull plating. Suffice to say, it kicks ass. Of course, ramming a starship into it cripples it enough (based on Kurtzman and Orci’s explanation) which I guess is why the Kelvin shuttles were able to escape.

But the Narada simply gets sucker-punched by red matter. Joy. So Nero wipes out Vulcan with a drop of it, and Spock provides payback with a Costco load of this future Vulcan technology in return. To borrow a line from the movie – how poetic.

It would’ve been nice to at least see the Enterprise take more of a pounding. She lost a few plates on the nacelle, got hit by a torpedo, scraped against some debris … but that’s it. I mean even Kahn, Chang, and Shinzon did a better job in this regard and they had way smaller ships. While it’s common in Trek for human ingenuity to win over technology, I still would’ve liked to see the Enterprise get beat up some more. You know, like easily damaging the front of the nacelles to the point where the Starfleet ship designers reconsider its engineering and re-shape it for the next movie.

Note to future villains: if you’re in the same situation as Nero and you see the Enterprise coming at you, keep shooting with your superior firepower. There’s no need to show both the old and young Spock what you’re about to do to Vulcan. Don’t double dip. Don’t open a channel and make your bad guy threats. Don’t waste time by gloating over the good guy while going hand-to-hand. Just shoot and ask questions later. This should all be covered in Successful Bad Guys 101.

485. Admiral New - May 15, 2009

JJ Abrams’s Star Trek is a fast and noisy reboot of the 40-year-old franchise. The visual effects are spectacular, and the new cast’s renditions of the iconic characters are superb. Especially noteworthy are Zachary Quinto’s more tense, edgy take on Spock, and Karl Urban’s flawless rendition of the cranky but conscientious Bones McCoy. It’s unfortunate that the movie is bogged down by a clunky and contrived plot, and is robbed of genuine drama by limited character development. Then again, maybe that’s too much to ask from this movie, which boldly goes where many summer movies have gone before.

5 out of 10

486. topas - May 15, 2009

Seen it a week ago in the day of polish premiere, May 8th – definately going to see it again sometime soon.
Wonder if will get the exact same reaction to some scenes as I did originally :)

The opening scene with the Narada pounding the Kelvin and it’s subsequent kamikaze-finale was the highlight of the movie. Unfortunatelly the rest did not keep up with it – on several levels. What we get with the Kelvin opening is a pure incarnation of good old Trek – as it shall look like when you think of a 1960’s sci-fi. With a little dark underbelly. Wrote this in a different section of this messageboard already but have to repeat myself as what I’m about to write catches the essence of this scene. First time in history of Star Trek we get to see space as a really dangerous place; not a 2d star background with slowly moving ship models on a string… The first seconds when you see the Kelvin passing by the camera, with the classic TOS sensor sounds in background, busy radio channels – THIS is how TOS / pre-TOS Star Trek shall be. The very second the Kelvin appeared, with all those effects and darkness and silence around – I whispered with excitement: “I already like; hell I do!”
This was exploration of space, the unknown with all it’s dangers and consequences. And had what the finest Star Trek moments had to offer – a maritime feel to it. You could easily say that the USS Kelvin was a 19th century steamship that had a bad luck of meeting a giant sea monster emerging from the depths… trully awesome and really breathtaking!!

But then the rest of the film was too colourful, too bright and too ‘easy’…
I did like it and left the theatre with a huge smile; yet after a week passed there are some critic thoughts; and hopefully constructive ones:

– the scene with young Jim stealing the Vette; in my opiio it shall be there. This would underline the bond he has to his tragically lost father. What we get in a movie is only a glimpse of a rude boy – but with no motivation. Without the background story – even if this was a short one; will need to wait for a DVD to come out – this is just a selfrageous act with no meaning at all.
Later in the film we get to see Kirk being really atached to his father’s legacy – as in the cave scene with Spock Prime; when he asks if in Spock’s timeline he knew his father. The only other scene that reminds us / or just singnalises this attachment is after the bar fight and chat with captain Pike; when Kirk holds the Kelvin model…
Kirk lost his father to Nero; later on Spock lost his mother to him – this would be a good tiyng up thing to make the friendship start and work; a solid base to build upon – if the parental aspect of Kirk’s youth would be axploited more carefully and extended. In my opinion ;)

– EARTH…
This seems to be the weak spot of all ST movies and episodes….
Someone already made a good point about this but it NEEDS to be underlined again until screenwriters of the upcoming [?] productions realise that it is horrendously stupid to show Earth as a planet unguarded! OK, there is a nice scene in the beginnin of the journey. We actually see that the Enterprise IS a part of Starfleet, leaving the spacedock along with other NCC’s… But hey, 8 ships departed from Earth and suddenly we’re faced with a ‘nobody’s home’ situation where anybody can place their doomsday ship in orbit and do whatever he likes?
Besides – this way of showing earth is totally crap when viewed in context of Pike’s treatment he’d been given on Narada… Why is Nero asking to reveal the defense secrets of Earth as there are no defenses to stop him from reaching it in the first place? This makes Pike’s “torture” a totally unnecessary scene… Plus; do not know what is the consequence of swallowing a bug like one served to Pike… but do you end up in a wheelchair afterwards?

– Allmighty E..
As written before in the opening of this ‘nitpick-review'; the rest of the film was too easy.. The E should get damaged, a LOT! We got some nacelle scratching, one torpedo hit, and what? that’s all? There was way toi little sacrifice, too little to struggle… The closing battle scene should’ve contained some footage of the E not being able to shoot all of Narada’s projectiles, or even Better -> instead of blindly warping-in to the scene with guns blazing [how the hell did they know what to expect miliseconds after leaving warp???] the E should appear in the skirmish; quickly analize the threat [dramatic closeup/zoom on the viewscreen to see that Spock is in danger] and push her impulse engines hard to put herself between the Jellyfish and the missiles; taking few of them with phaser-fire i the process of course.. We did it but it was not a piece of cake… – would be far more better. Hope to see the new E getting punded in the next movie; not a ‘let’s push a we-win button’ situation again, please….

Even if this made the new ST a 3hour film; so let it be

487. topas - May 15, 2009

PS:

And please do make the engineering sections of the starships like they really are 23rd century locations…
Brilliant example of this is when you see the refit of 1701 in TMP; this ship is really top of the line and you see it – it’s spacy inside, it has the tech.. What does the new E have? The bridge and few corridors… There’s a tremendous difference in how different sections of the ship look… With every other starship in previous movies there was a feel of integrity; it’s one ship we’re on, you can spot it by the similarity of the inner design of the sets; [ok, with exception of ST-V, where they overused the TNG sets...]…

A decent, proper, good ol’Warp Core for the next movie would be something really appreciated ;)

488. topas - May 15, 2009

Forgot to rate…

Acting: 10/10
Effects: 10/10
Music: 8/10
Plot inconsistencies/ parts where it could have been done better -> – 2 points

Overal: 8+/10

489. ptama - May 15, 2009

Things I liked about the new Trek film:
1. When the armada goes into warp it sound like multiple gunshots being fired.

2. Uhura, finally a strong female character that can stand up to the men, even Spock.

3. McCoy. Urban nailed it.

4. Time travel can explain away many things, like how come the Enterprise looks more advanced than the1969 Enterprise of TOS. After the Romulans change the time line this time line advance more rapidly than the original timeline.

5. The new ship looks great. The enterprise is like one those familiar characters we grew to love, Scratch that, the enterprise is the main character; there is no Start trek without the Enterprise, with the exception of Voyager and DS9, the one consistent character in the whole series is the Enterprise.

6. I liked the scenes on earth you don’t get to see earth too much in Star Trek.

Things I hated:
1. Chekhov’s ridiculous accent. It is the future, people can literally live in China and commute by transporter to work in Arizona and go back home that evening. It’s like the guy was living in exile in Siberia and was just released.

2. Winona Ryder died

3 Can’t say I really appreciated the refinery look of that part of engineering. Although it does make sense that there would be a water purification plant on board; Big enough to satisfy 430 people.

4, Lot of inconsistencies in the film. Kirk has been in Starfleet academy for 3 years and the first time he sees Spock is in the Kobayashi Maru tribunal?

All in all probably my favorite Trek movie yet; Yes it’s even better that Kahn. Stat Trek TMP was so bad that any movie that came after would have been seemed great.

490. Wil Hostman - May 15, 2009

9.5 out of ten on first view.

Love the uniforms.
The casting is excellent. The playing of Scotty for laughs isn’t new (Not since ST IV, really), but is pulled off far more naturally.

The core characters (Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Uhura, Sulu, Checkov) all worked for me. And We do get to see that Checkov isn’t just there for affirmative action; he’s the “hot hands” on the transporter targeting. Each of them is top of their class for something, except Bones… and He’s a Lt probbly for the same reasons modern MD’s usually are: that doctoral degree is worth a higher starting grade.

I dislike one element: we just showed that JT Kirk, in the new version, was a junior officer for about 60 minutes, and out of it for 30 of them. No heart to hear with troubled ensigns in this version.

Visually, awesome. Pacing, awesome. Humor, appropriate and well placed.

491. Eric Raven - May 16, 2009

I don’t really understand why no one is mentioning this. The music for this Star Trek film was absolutely awful. The theme is a rip-off of the 1989 Batman theme, like so many other film scores since then. Of course, the Danny Elfman Batman theme is, in turn, a rip-off of Mozart.

The theme for this film is so incredibly dull. It’s not simple – it’s simpleton. After you get simpleton once, you then get it three more times in a row.

After that, you are subjected to the same theme (including the batman-and-every-other-comic-book-movie ripoff chord changes) in almost every cue of the entire movie.

This composer is WAY to busy. There is more than one scene that sounds like it was re-copied from an episode of Lost. I’m sure i’m not the only one who noticed that.

Sorry guys, but you can’t phone in the music for a Star Trek movie.

I loved this movie in every way except for this.

492. SJ - May 16, 2009

I have watched Star Trek from the first episode in 1966 thru the last episode of the Enterprise and I know the franchise well. Although this new “Star Trek” is an entertaining movie, it does not feel like Star Trek at all. The actors in this movie were excellent, the special effects were great, the action non-stop and the sets were awesome. However, the depth and heart of a story was not there for me and the whole premise of the Nero revenge thing did not make sense. I agree with another fan who wrote that Nero should have spent his time trying to warn the Romulans about the fate of their planet rather than trying to make Spock suffer by destroying Vulcan. Also really, really, really disliked the story twists with Vulcan being destroyed, Spocks’ mother dying, Uhura/Spock romance, Scotty with an alien “little buddy” (Scotty didn’t like aliens) and the almost psychotic Kirk as a child driving his step-father’s car over a cliff (Kirk didn’t have a step-father nor was he psychotic). These continuity changes demonstrate to me that the writers were not familiar with the TOS, wanted to pander to some demographic other than Trekkies and/or LAZINESS! This film was more like the cotton-candied, bubble-gum chewing, empty-headed STAR WARS franchise; which is not in the same class as Star Trek.
Personally, I will not see this movie again as I have with other Star Trek movies and series. JJ, stick with “LOST” which btw I love!

493. The Realist - May 16, 2009

After seeing Trek with some family members, I cam ou, and we all said at once, that was Trek. I absolutely adore TNG and ENT, but this was something special, something big. Some on here are saying that “our kirk” etc are gone, but they are not, they are still there in TOS and TOS Movies. Star Trek lives again, it lives for a new generation, something the Rodenberry would have wanted.

And this achieved something that Star Wars (mainly the prequals) never could, it has achieved a soul and a life of its own.

494. Affonso - May 16, 2009

I give this movie a 6/10. Don’t get me wrong. I like the movie. However, let me explain without being a spoiler. I saw the movie a few days after opening. I like the actors. Even Zoe Saldana and Chris Pine weren’t as impressive to me. The plot was also fine. However, my great dissatisfaction was the build up and the emergence of the characters. I said I don’t want to spoil. So I will explain as ambiguously as possible.
A young person wrecking an antique does not impress me. There must be a less rediculous way to show that a young lad is full of life and energy and is a natural born leader.
Next, it is understandible that a man, or vulcan, can be given a special commission that would cause him to obtain the rank of Commander. However, special commissions are for specialist areas, not for command. I should know, I have a commission in the military. Anyway, the prestegious Starfleet Academy is for the training of Officers, just like any other officer academy in the world. Training, presumably like West Point, Annapolis and others would be for four years. Even in England, an officer would go to Sandhurst, Dartmouth etc for a year basic officer training, and then go for further training as an officer. In other words, it takes years before you are ready to sit in command. It’s not how gifted you are, it’s the journey you must travel before you sit in command. That’s why my vision of Starfleet Academy is that it must be a step up from what exists today: potential officers must train long and hard and will not bypass that for any reason, not even if they were the most gifted being in the universe.
So, even though I have no problem with Staff and Faculty of the Academy being called out for command during an important situation, the cadets belong in the Academy until they properly graduate.
Next, Urban is great as McCoy, but his excuse to get Kirk onboard the Enterprise stinks.
Next, there are many officers on a starship. Again, military experience talking here. There is one Captain, a couple Commanders and Lt Commanders; many Lts, Sub-Lts and Midshipmen (and yes, the crew will be very similar to that of a naval crew).
Ohh!! and then there would be Fleet Chief Petit Officers, Chief Petit Officers, Petit Officers, Leading Hands, and Able-Bodied Men. Where does a cadet from Starfleet Academy fall in that? Zilch!!!. He has no place in that structure. He has no legal authourity to do anything on a starship (since I expect that laws would be highly respected in that era).
So, if there is no Captain (as the developing plot shows) and the Commander is unfit for what ever reason, the next in line is NOT a cadet from the Academy. So, I convulsed and almost puked at this point, since all my faith in the starfleet military system, which I hope the human race is going toward, was being attacked.

And there were other officers on the ship. And even if all the officers were unfit, it still doesn’t come down to a cadet. There would be the Fleet Chief Petit Officer who has more experience than the best and brightest cadet.

And remember what I said about law. An Able-Bodied Man has legal authourity to make decisions in his department or area on a starship. A cadet has no legal authourity to make any kind of decision about anything anywhere in the whole Starfleet.

Thank you for that. I needed to air my grouse. I can now watch the movie a second time and enjoy it for being a movie.

495. captain_neill - May 16, 2009

Stop saying the original timeline is erased it is not.

It still exists, THis whole movie is in a parallel timeline.

496. Harry Ballz - May 16, 2009

I went to see Angels+Demons last night…..WHAT A PIECE OF CRAP! The actors were good, but the direction, story and pacing were terrible! Ron Howard shouldn’t be allowed to direct traffic! This should bode well for Trek’s continued box-office run!

497. quacks5 - May 16, 2009

340

I have to disagree. I thought this movie was better than Lost in Space. In fact, that’s how I’ve been describing it to folks, “better than the Lost in Space movie.” It’s called damning with faint praise.

498. quacks5 - May 16, 2009

Finally watched the season 4 finale of Lost last night. Hmmm, any plot similarities? They retconned a reset button into Lost, but ST09 had it as the core plot device. Seems to me J.J. & crew have succumbed to Space Madness. So many people have complained about Cadet Kirk going straight to Captain Kirk. That obviously was inspired by Space Cadet Stimpy being given such an important assignment. Even explains the red matter, the beautiful, shiny red matter, the jolly, candy-like red matter.

499. quacks5 - May 16, 2009

Re Narada design: Maybe if It’d watched ST:VIII thru X I’d have more appreciation for the design? As a fan of Babylon 5, my first thought was an unholy alliance of Shadow (the black shiny stuff) and Vorlon (the squid-like shape). I didn’t think of either Romulan or Borg. So it kinda threw me out of the Trek universe. But it was scary and menacing. The energy cloud reminded me of V’ger (from TMP), but that seemed derivative rather than meaningful

The interior made no sense to me at all. Was there a reason for the flooding that I missed? The cavernous spaces and random catwalks seemed to serve no function other than to add the danger of falling to the fight scenes. Maybe if I’d read Countdown? Anyway, here’s my rationale: (1) since Romulus was destroyed the ship probably had to be pieced together with whatever was available, by (2) whoever was available, which probably did not mean skilled starship designers and engineers, and since (3) Nero was a miner it was only natural that the design be cavernous, that is, cave-like.

500. Doc Rice - May 16, 2009

#499 quacks5

Countdown will answer some of your questions about the Narada.

501. Balok - May 16, 2009

Ok, finally saw the movie, as a die hard TOS fan, I can’t complain, 8 out of 10. Mr. Orci, good job.

Seeing Nimoy was great, I also thought the new crew did a very good job… The film didn’t really have an epic feel to it, but story was fine and good to see Paramount weren’t cheapskates as in prior Trek movies. At times, the movie seemed to movie along too fast, I guess alot to squeeze into 2 hours (which went by quickly).

502. brady - May 17, 2009

Have no fear TOS purists. After my 4th viewing, I realized that in 129 yrs the Hobus supernova will reappear. Spock will kill Nero in the Romulan senate. Nero will never destroy the Kelvin and the original timeline will be reset. Oh and if we can put up with 4 years of the DAHLIBAMA, surely we can put up with 129 years of JJ’s trek.(had to throw ina lil political talk)lol
Although I did enjoy the new movie. I can’t wait to see what new and exciting things Kirk hangs on to next time.(how many cliffs and platforms can one man hold on to for dear life inna movie?)

503. Balok - May 17, 2009

Yes 502, I like it 30 years from now, after 10 movies with this crew, the next, next gen kids can have the real TOS back…

504. Felipe - May 17, 2009

In not a Trekkie but like Star Trek.
Just a few things about the new Release.
Quinto did an excellent job as Spok. Logical as always, a little more emotional than Nimoy in the original series but I think that immaturity is more appropriate for his age.
The Spok in the original series seems more mature at the same age but I would have expected that maturity coming at an older age. In that sense, the new Spok goes more accordingly to his young age.
The guy that did McCoy was awesome.
The guy that did the new Kirk was really good. Different, but it reminded me a lot to the original Kirk when McCoy injected him with whatever to get him to board the Enterprise AND when he said: “stop it” and “bullshit”, that was “original older age” Kirk.
In those scenes that I mention, the New young Kirk remind me to the original Older Kirk. (Shatner portrayed a more serious Capt. Kirk when he was young and a more comical Kirk, as he got older)
Now the GOOD PART: SHIP DESIGN
The new ship, took me a couple of hours to digest it because we got so used to the original designs. However, in my opinion these new dimensions are more structurally sound than those of the original ships AND also are better aesthetically, love the longer nacelles and the lower neck and the smaller saucer ratio to the nacelles.
Original 1701, 1701A and B are structurally terrible inside Earth (Gravity) and In Space. Specially the Nacelle “engine mounts” to the secondary hulls. I know I’ll get stoned by saying this but it’s the truth.
1701C and D, I might be Ok for them only in the vacuum and gravity free space but I still have issues with their mounts, more in C than in D, although better than their predecessors.
Enterprise E seems to me Ok. I am ok with how the primary and secondary hulls are attached and I am ok with the mounts of the nacelles to the secondary hulls, much meatier bigger mounts (I guess one of the consultants of this ship design was a structural engineer).
The original design definitely could have used the scrutiny of a structural engineer. Many Sharp Edges, great for stress concentrations and dooming the ship on the first 5 minutes of voyage. sorry guys but it’s the truth.
I still have my reservations about the Structural soundness of the new ship, but definitely, it’s better than the original. Primary to Secondary Hull attachment (the neck) seems ok. Nacelle mounts, better, but not totally convinced of their structural soundness.
In fact, of all the important Federation Ships the most structurally sound ship is USS Voyager. The Worst: Original 1701 followed closely by A.
Remember one thing is aesthetics. You might love how a ship looks but that is nothing if that ship breaks apart when it leaves the dock. Aesthetically speaking, I like the new design better than the old one.
Engineering wise, the scene of Scotty being beamed inside a tank and into what I can assume is a cooling system for the engines was stupid. The cooling system itself was stupid (If that is what it was).
And the opening of the release valve to let Scotty out before being chopped by those rotating blades was definitely stupid. I do not know where the Engineering Consultants were for this scene.

505. Cousin Itt - May 17, 2009

Finally saw Trek yesterday (5/16.) I know – but trust me, a broken arm and bronchitis are not the best companions in a theater. I’m glad I waited – although after seeing the movie, maybe I should have just stayed away. I want to like it – really – and there is a lot to admire. But this film must be held up against the fact that no other Trek has ever had the resources that this project had. And yet, in the end, there are just too many ‘dumb’ things that completely spoil it for me.

What I liked:
The opening scene with the Kelvin. Awesome – hell, even touching. Reminded me of the very first scene of DS9 – and that’s a good thing.

Karl Urban – its been said enough – he rocks.

Zachary Quinto. This was a surprise, given that he was virtually absent from the trailers and promos.

The overall design. I didn’t mind the engineering changes as much as I thought I would. The new Enterprise looks fine, although I still don’t understand why it had to change.

Now the hard part – what I didn’t like.

Nero – rather than trying to help his people survive, he hangs out in space for twenty five years waiting for Spock Prime to show up? I know that there is a deleted scene that shows him at Rura Penthe, but if its not in the movie…

The Kobyashi Maru. Without a doubt, the worst scene in the movie and a complete slap in the face of an iconic Trek moment. Kirk is smart enough to reprogram the simulator, but apparently too stupid to not act like a complete jackass during the simulation, thus insuring that everyone immediately knows that he cheated. And Spock did the programming? Give me a break…

Too many ‘out of character’ moments. Pike doesn’t know many of his bridge officers? Is that why he makes Kirk First Officer after five minutes? Sulu can’t pilot out of space dock? Uhura consoles Spock during a crisis – on the transporter platform while Kirk watches? Chekov is the Russian Wesley Crusher? For me, the biggest of these is Spock – in command of the Enterprise in a battle situation – leaving the ship to rescue his parents. Are you kidding me? Spock would NEVER do something like this, I don’t care how many timelines have been changed. He could’ve easily sent down a security detail to rescue them, but that wouldn’t have been as dramatic, of course.

Speaking of Vulcan (or Earth) – where are the other ships? Planetary defenses? Shutting off those drills doesn’t appear to be that difficult…luckily the new flagship without a captain has a crafty bunch of cadets on board – one of whom is going to be made the captain of said flagship at graduation. Riiiiight…

The music – was Rick Berman brought in as a consultant? The score itself is okay but seriously, there should be a law somewhere that says “when you show the Enterprise, you must hear the Star Trek coda.”

Since 1987, Star Trek has been in a seemingly never ending cycle – hardly ever able to reach its true potential. For every “Inner Light” and “The Visitor” there are dozens of “Threshold”‘s and “Samaritan Snare”‘s. And the new movie is no exception. I think that a reworked version of this story could have been told in the original timeline – without all of the bs coincidences – and it could have been just as accessible and just as exciting. And it certainly should have been SMARTER. I know that the writers wanted to wipe the canvas clean for later installments, but why? They aren’t making a tv series – they couldn’t think of two more stories with this crew that would fit inside the Trek universe? I wasn’t watching the movie yesterday thinking ‘Oooh, its a new timeline – I wonder if Kirk and Sulu are going to go splat.’ There is an assumption in any movie like this that the heroes are going to make it. And why go to all the trouble to introduce these characters if you are planning on knocking them off later?

So the movie is a huge hit, and this is now the Trek we are going to have for a long time. I have a lot of faith in Damon Lindelof. Lost is one of the best shows ever made, and if he can interject some of Lost’s intelligence and combine it with at least a speck of Roddenberry’s vision – perhaps this crew will live long and prosper – and not be so stupid.

506. dave - May 17, 2009

I know I am petty, but I cant accept the parallel timeline. I was watching some TNG episodes where Picard was on Vulcan. I had to turn it off, knowing this doesn’t happen now. As I said, i know I am petty.

Re: 502.

i like your thinking

507. Chuck - May 17, 2009

I am somewhat in the camp with dave there (#506). Was the movie good? It was fantastic, but……. I AM annoyed with the new timeline plot. I’m hopeful it will be reinstated thru something done in a future movie. But for now, everything out on TV and in the theaters until now, except for “Star Trek: Enterprise” has been reduced to a “Sorry folks, but all this never really happened now!”….except in the mind of the elder Mr. Spock, of course. Now I kinda know how “Dallas” fans felt when the network pulled that “Oh, last season was all a dream” crap so they could bring back Patrick Duffy (“Bobby Ewing”) after he had been supposedly killed off.

But that’s just me… I wasn’t all that keen on the James Bond series being started all over again, as if none of the other movies ever happened, either.

In a nutshell, if you’ve never really been that attached to Star Trek, you won’t care about what I’m griping about and will love this movie. I think the movie is great except for the above, and of course, as always, the billions of holes you can poke into anything that has occurred in a story based on time travel….like Terminator…can you really send a friend back in time so he will create you by being your father? I mean, how are you there in the first place, to send Reis back?….but I digress…

Ignoring the “reboot” thing, I would give this movie 9/10.

And Brady (502)….Obama is an infinite improvement over his dimwitted predecessor….then again, so would have my sister’s dead cat…

508. Jeriann Fisher - May 17, 2009

We just saw it for the 2nd time, this time in IMAX. What a neat experience.

We found the tribble.

We found Nurse Chappel’s silent walk on part – one scene. (She hands McCoy a Hypo. )

cast – 10 Where DID they find Chris Pine. Isn’t he perfect? His performance was a tribute to, but not an imitation of Mr. Shatner. There were many times when I could HEAR Mr. Shatner say the line exactly the same way, yet Mr. Pine did not copy his predecessor.

Zach Quinto as Spock was “different”. More human. He’ll take a bit of getting used to.

Karl Urban – a perfect Bones.
The supporting crew members were ok. But I agree that Sulu looked bored.

directing – 10

music – 8. I was a little disappointed. The score reminded me too much of Batman, for some reason.

story – well – 8. I had a problem with the destruction of Vulcan and I felt the romance gratuitous. What was Kirk’s rank before rising from Cadet to Captain? How was Uhura a Lieutenant, suddenly, and Kirk a Cadet? Still, can’t you just imagine the disbelief at Starfleet Command when they learned WHO had commanded the Enterprise so brilliantly to save Earth?

cinematography – 8. Enough with the flares and the shaky hand held camera. Lock that camera down, please.

set, art design, special effects – 10. The film had $$$ in every shot.

Thank you for giving us back our Star Trek!

509. sean - May 17, 2009

#505

“thus insuring that everyone immediately knows that he cheated”

Since any outcome other than the destruction of the ship was impossible, they’d know he cheated automatically. Didn’t matter if he strutted around or if he was humble as can be.

510. Photon Torpedo - May 17, 2009

I am a fan of the real one and only Star Trek-the old series, and in my opinion, the movie wasn’t a patch on it.It was clear from the start that the man who produced this…entertainment?….didn’t know anything about the show and used “creative license” by adding elements of Star Wars to it.There’s an old saying and it goes like this”If it’s not broken, do not fix it.”
The part in the movie where Captain Pike tells Sulu to “Punch It “to get the Enterprise to go into warp drive is a direct lift fromStar Wars-Han Solo tells the Wookie to do the same to the Millenium Falcon;the Federation looked shockingly similar to the the Alliancein uniform style when you see Cadet Kirk being brought to trial,the Enterprise had laser cannons on it’s saucer that fired the phasers,similar to the ones seen on the spaceships in Star WarsAnd I am so sorry, but Montgomery Scott was no fool and did not have a pet that looked as if it came sraight from the cantina on Tatooine.The Romulan ship looked like one of the ships from Babylon 5-I have nothing against Star Warsbut this is a STAR TREK movie, and since it is a
STAR TREK movie about how the characters from the original series came together,then it should have remained true to the timeline and dovetailed to fit what was known about them already, without the references to Star Wars or Babylon 5.Star Trek predated both of these and dare I say it? ….was more than likely what inspired their creators.I feel that this man’s effortsis a slap in the face to Gene Roddenberry, the original cast and the fans who, when
the show was cancelled in 1969, led a dogged letter writing campaign to have the show they loved ressurected-all that hard work, determination and integrity has shamefully come to this.I understand that this person is
supposedly going to make more of these …..movies?What a sad end for the noble starship Enterprise and her crew, who were heroes and role models for generations of fans.He should not be allowed to make another one.Shame on him, and on Paramount for allowing it.

511. SJ - May 17, 2009

Photon Torpedo, you said everything I felt about this new “Star Trek” movie. I hope JJ Abrams and his crew get the message. Thank you.

512. AvPlaya - May 18, 2009

I really love this film. I’m not really a huge ST fan but I like it better than Star Wars. I grew up watching TNG episodes and I even liked Voyager. I can say that my expectation was pretty low coming into it…. Nemesis was just aweful. But I did enjoy Lost so I saw it anyway… and I’m glad I did. The most amazing thing is that my wife even liked it. I haven’t been this hyped about a movie since, well, LOTR I think. Good job all around, despite many plot holes and weird set designs (you can tell it’s really just a brewery). Given the expectation, J.J Abrams went against all odds and triumphs – and Trek fans every where should rejoice. There’s going to be more Trek now! With bigger budget than ever! KIDS will start to love Star Trek! It’s not going to die with old geek farts like us! Star Trek is now COOL again, like it was in the 60’s! What’s not to love?

My most favorite part of the new film is that – this is really now a TEAM. Not one bad-ass captain and his crew. Kirk almost never wins a fight, and he was saved several time by his teammates. Everyone is essential in this version.

After reading some of the bitter reviews here, I can only say one thing – Leonard is RIGHT – you guys ARE dickheads. If you hate this movie due so some canon and dogma, please, go back to your other geeky hobbies. I’m sure the new fandom won’t miss you one bit.

As for the guy who bitches about Captain Robau, you, sir, are Dickhead Prime here. How is he NOT heroic? He went on a super-powerful ship by himself knowing it was a suicide mission – that’s why he make George Kirk Captain – he know he’s probably going to die. This is the same kind of courage displayed by George Kirk 12 minutes later, and by Captain Pike near Vulcan – A captain faces almost certain death by himself in order to save his crew and ship. I know some people are bothered by he color of his skin – the actor is Pakistani – and I hope that’s not where your “issue” came from. I am really tired of the Dickhead fanboys… Please if you hate it so much, vow never to see another J.J Abrams directed Star Trek again.

513. SChaos1701 - May 18, 2009

510

The only problem with the freedom of speech is that it gives the ignorant a stage.

514. captain_neill - May 18, 2009

The whole movie is in a parallel timeline, it exists separate from the rest of Trek.

The timeline of the past 5 shows and movies is still intact, Uhura saifd “Alternative Reality”

Vulcan still exists in the prime timeline. The timelines diverged, it has not been over written.

When it comes to Canon I stick to the past 5 shows and movies, this new movie is separate and starts a new parallel timeline. They can even do a cross over with the new timeline with the original timeline.

Please stop thinking the original timeline is gone, it is not, this is basically a mirror universe.

As far as canon is for me me, Vulcan is still there. In a parallel universe it is gone.

I also can say the black hole toook them to a diff universe.

There is no way that the old timeline is gone, I will not allow JJ Abrams to do that. Our Trek is still intact and this movie is just a parallel to it.

Ok.

515. Cousin Itt - May 18, 2009

#509 – That’s what made beating the Kobyashi Maru so cool – Kirk beat the ‘no-win scenario.’ When relating the story in TWOK, no one immediately assumes he cheated. It would have been much better in the new movie if Kirk had played it straight, and was later discovered to have ‘changed the conditions of the test.’ Of course, all of these scenes whiz by so fast, that there is very little room for subtlety or real personal discovery.

516. Robert Gillis - May 18, 2009

#514: Until my DVDs disappear, the original time line is intact.

There is an excellent, detailed article by Bob Orci somewhere on this site where he specifically says the original time line still exists.

517. Michael Burton - May 18, 2009

STAR TREK MOVIE REVIEW:
DON’T CALL IT STAR TREK

By Michael Burton

In an interview with MTV, Star Trek movie writer Roberto Orci revealed that he and co-screenwriter Alex Kurtzman wrote an alternate ending with William Shatner intended to be Kirk and Spock’s last scene together. He explained it was shelved because the filmmakers “were ultimately split internally. We didn’t want it to be gimmick; we wanted to really bring him back the right way…Because Kirk died in the movies – he died in canon – it was very hard to come up with a way to bring him back in the movie that didn’t feel contrived.”
The new Star Trek writers’ explanation strains their fragile credibility, since just about every plot element in the film is contrived and hastily developed to achieve the filmmakers’ main goal – develop a brainless action adventure film to entertain younger viewers. Despite the movie’s many flaws, most critical reviews of the film contain little criticism at all. It’s touted as “pure bliss,” “magnificent,” “a tour de force,” and a film that has “revised and revitalized the franchise.”
The film is neither magnificent nor a tour de force. What it is, though, is a big-budget blockbuster reboot that not only falls short of the best Star Trek films (“The Wrath of Khan,” “The Voyage Home” and “First Contact”) but dumbs down Star Trek so it can appeal to a less sophisticated audience. The best of Trek in the theatre and on television contained drama, social relevance, clever narratives, wit, adventure and believable science fiction; not shallow, one-dimensional characters, unbelievable narratives, and cheap entertainment tricks.
What’s truly regrettable is that the director had a choice – make another Transformer-like kiddie film with totally new characters, or use Gene Roddenberry’s original characters to draw in the classic original fan base and remain true to the classic Trek. Instead of making that choice he tried to do both, by creating a story where he did not have to be faithful to the original characters or the Star Trek stories that have gone before. Much to the delight of Paramount Films, he created a blockbuster, but in so doing killed Gene Roddenberry’s vision of what Star Trek is supposed to be all about.
WARNING: PLOT POINTS FOLLOW:
Let’s begin with the plot, and see if it makes any sense: In the year 2387, a star goes supernova, threatening to destroy the Romulan home world and the entire galaxy (never mind that supernovas don’t destroy whole galaxies – for one to even destroy a planet the planet would have to be orbiting the star that explodes). Ambassador Spock pilots a Vulcan ship that looks like a huge jellyfish carrying unidentified “red matter” that will create a gravitational force to draw the supernova into a black hole. However, Spock is too late to save Romulus, and the supernova wipes out all of Romulus. Captain Nero, who commands a small Romulan mining ship, the Narada, has just watched his family and home world die, vows to exact revenge on Spock for trying to save his planet. (yes, you read that right). Can’t exact that revenge because both his ship and Spock’s are caught in the black hole’s event horizon, traveling to the past and apparently creating some alternative parallel timeline from the original Star Trek series (never mind that black holes, which do exist in the universe, do not create time vortexes, wormholes do. A true black hole would have crushed both ships). Nero arrives some 150 years before the supernova, accidentally and coincidentally landing to the Starfleet Academy days of James T. Kirk (played by Chris Pine) and Spock. Nero’s mining ship destroys a whole Starfleet armada as well as the Kelvin, the ship Kirk’s father is piloting, leaving Kirk without the guiding influence of a father. Captain Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood), dismayed that Kirk is wasting his intelligence on reckless behavior, shames Kirk into joining Starfleet Academy after Kirk gets beaten up in a bar barroom brawl where’s he’s seen lusting after Uhuru.
Once in the Academy, he clashes with Commander Spock (Zachary Quinto) who tries to get Kirk court-martialed for cheating on his Kobayashi Maru test. He begins his friendship with Leonard McCoy (Karl Urban) who smuggles him onto the new Enterprise, which is steaming ahead to answer a distress call from the planet Vulcan. Kirk tells Pike he recognizes the similarities between the distress call from Vulcan and the encounter that destroyed the Kelvin (How did Kirk know this? Why, by reading a dissertation about the Kelvin incident that Pike evidently forgot he wrote in the Academy). Strangely, Lt. Uhura casually tells her roommate that she translated a mysterious message detailing the destruction of the fleet by a large Romulan ship, but fails to inform Captain Pike until he’s about to fly into a trap. Alas, the Enterprise arrives too late, and the Vulcan fleet has been destroyed. As the Narada drills into Vulcan’s core (these mining ships must be pretty strong to drill into whole planets!) Nero orders Pike to surrender himself. Pike agrees, promoting Spock to captain and promoting Kirk – a cadet who’s been suspended from Starfleet Academy – to first officer. En route to the Narada, Kirk, Hikaru Sulu (John Cho) perform a daring orbital skydive onto the drilling platform (sort of like a high flying oil rig in the atmosphere that conveniently disrupts transporter beams) to try and destroy it. Sulu saves Kirk with his expert fencing and Kirk in turn saves Sulu from falling to his death. Both were too late to prevent Nero from launching this red matter into the planet’s core, imploding the planet into a black hole. Spock rescues most of the planet’s leaders, including his father, but his mother dies along with most of the population of Vulcan. Vulcan is no more, and now Earth is the next planet on Nero’s target list for destruction.
It’s here that the coincidences and contrivances begin to multiply fast than warp speed. After a heated argument, Spock decides to punish Kirk’s rebelliousness not by throwing him in the brig, but by MAROONING him on a freezing, desolate planet full of carnivorous creatures ready to have him for dinner. He escapes these creatures by running into a cave inhabited by an older Spock (“Spock Prime,” played by Leonard Nimoy) who has also been coincidentally stranded there for 25 years (We are not told much about what the evil Nero was doing for 25 years, but we do know he had captured Spock and marooned him on this ice planet so he could witness the destruction of Vulcan). Spock Prime explains everything to the young Kirk through a mind meld and tells him he must gain command of the Enterprise. In another stroke of luck, the two run into the one individual who can help them –Montgomery Scott (Simon Pegg), whose presence working alone at this solitary Federation outpost on the icy planet with his Yoda-like sidekick is another unexplained coincidence. Spock beams Kirk and Scottie aboard the Enterprise. Once on board, Kirk angers Spock, forcing him to pass his command to cadet Kirk due to being emotionally compromised.
Kirk rescues Pike, Spock retakes the elder Spock’s ship, destroys the drill and lures the Narada away from Earth before piloting a collision course. The Enterprise arrives in the nick of time and beams Kirk, Pike, and Spock away before the collision, which releases the remaining red matter and creates a black hole that destroys the Narada. The Enterprise escapes by igniting the warp drive’s reactor core, with the explosion pushing them clear to safety. Cadet Kirk is promoted to captain of the Enterprise and Spock has a brief encounter with his older self who advises him to stay in Starfleet so he can become a good buddy with Kirk.
NOTE: END OF PLOT SPOILERS
The main problem with the believability of this movie lies not in its time travel hokinesss, but in its main premise: that the villain would blame the only person who tried to save the planet Romulus and kill billions in “retribution.” When Nero found himself a couple hundred years in the past, then why didn’t he warn others that a catastrophe would occur and try to prevent it? Instead of blaming someone who tried to save your home world, would you try to kill billions of people, including your own wife before she was born? The writers tell us that Ambassador Spock arrived 25 years after the destruction of the USS Kelvin, and Nero captured his ship and the “red matter” that would prevent the supernova from destroying the galaxy. So what was Nero doing for 25 years? Why didn’t he use the red matter or try to evacuate the planet?
The contrived “coincidences” strained human logic, much less Vulcan logic. What are the odds that both Spock and Kirk could be marooned on the same planet and Kirk accidentally run into the same cave Spock is trapped in? The planet was a frozen wasteland with no plants or trees. How did Spock survive there for years, or, for that matter, get the wood for his fire? What was Scotty doing on the same planet and why did Spock prefer a cave to the outpost right over the next hill? Throughout the film, Star Wars-like creatures and environs seem just “thrown in” scenes for no particular reason.
Then there are the time paradoxes that never get explained because they are used solely to advance the ridiculous plot. If Vulcan was destroyed, then the jellyfish ship would never have been built, the red matter would never have been created, and Prime Spock wouldn’t have the means to create the black hole that caused the time traveling problem. In the classic Star Trek series, the challenge for the Enterprise crew was to try to undo the damage to the original timeline and try to set things right again, so obviously history would not change. In the Next Generation episode, “Yesterday’s Enterprise,” the Enterprise crew only affected their own reality and changed their own timeline. Even in Star Trek: First Contact the crew members took great pains not to interfere with major events and ensure incidents occurred as they were supposed to occur.
The best of Trek dealt with thorny issues of time travel sensitively, adroitly, and shrewdly, making sure things made some logical sense. This movie made no such attempt to restore history, and in fact implied that a new alternate reality could exist not only parallel to our reality, but right with it in the same time continuum. How can Spock Prime address his younger self without time and space just imploding? (For that matter, why did Spock Prime make Kirk promise not to tell the young Spock of his existence when he went ahead and revealed his existence in the end?) Or why didn’t other Vulcans time travel somewhere like Spock and Nero did? It’s all unexplained. Unlike any other Star Trek show or film, director Abrams uses time travel as a gimmick to advance the preposterous plot and throw away any exigency to be faithful to the original series or the original characters.
In fact, Star Trek is not a prequel at all, but a new universe with new characters that happen to have the same names. Of all the characters, Kirk is perhaps the character most unlike the original Kirk. Pine plays Kirk as a reckless, spoiled brat who gets everything handed to him on a silver platter by virtue of his lineage (although he does spend a great deal of time getting beaten to a pulp while avoiding serious injury, even from a perilous fall aboard the Romulan ship). While Pine does give Kirk some of the same qualities Shatner gave him (male chauvinism, ego), he failed to give Kirk any sense of dignity, sense of purpose, and more importantly, leadership. Pine’s Kirk is a childlike buffoon – more concerned about his own self-gratification than others who serve with him. In fact, the film’s writers use him as a vehicle to deliver their clownish gags that fall short of getting laughs. – whether it’s showing Kirk as a hopeless drunkard stuffed with Kleenex in his bloodied nose or presenting Kirk on the ship waking up with a numbed tongue and hands the size of semi-inflated balloons.
Zachary Qunito does a creditable job playing the young Spock, but fails to understand the true dichotomy of the Spock character, ending up becoming an angry version of the young Vulcan who apparently has no qualms about having an affair with a fellow officer (problematic for any Star Fleet officer, much less a Vulcan). Karl Urban plays Leonard McCoy close to the vest with a respect for the original character, but Anton Yelchin as Chekov tries so hard to emulate Walter Keonig’s voice and mannerisms he ends up becoming a pathetic and annoying parody. Zoe Saldana as Uhura in go-go boots is strictly there as eye candy. The only stellar acting in the film is ironically performed by someone not playing an original series character – Bruce Greenwood as Captain Christopher Pike, who is sincere, honorable, decisive, and authoritative in the role – more Kirk-like than the actor who played Kirk.
What’s missing in this 2009 Star Trek is more than the characters and their chemistry, however. What’s missing is that indefinable aura and philosophy of the original Star Trek that Gene Roddenberry developed as a hopeful optimism for the future of mankind. Star Trek at its core was social allegory that used clever and believable science fiction to reveal truths about ourselves, in the context of a space adventure filled with characters you cared about.
The new Twitter-era moviemakers are quick to play lip service to the Star Trek “canon” and the Star Trek universe, but are more concerned with action and spectacle than telling a dramatic story. “It’s actually nice when you’re given a box,” Abrams was quoted as saying. “When you’re given parameters that you have to honor because it gives you limits and then you know that within these boundaries, you can creatively risky.” In reality, Abrams went outside the box and decided to create his own parameters, effectively jettisoning the Star Trek universe in place of a Star Wars-like action picture with a complete disregard of what Star Trek is at its core. It may be good “popcorn candy’ blockbuster fare, but don’t call it Star Trek.
###

518. TonyD - May 18, 2009

I’ve seen the film twice now. Overall, I enjoyed it immensely but it isn’t perfect (what is?); some things work great, others not so much. As to a breakdown of other things that stood out:

What Works

– The opening scenes with the Kelvin, the birth of James T. Kirk and George Kirk going out in a blaze of glory was quite effective and moving.

– The scenes with Jacob Kogan as young Spock had a D.C. Fontana vibe to them; likewise Ben Cross’ scenes with the young and adult Spocks.

– The recast main crew are all very very good. I had my doubts about Pine, Pegg, Cho and Yelchin in particular but everyone does a great job with the material they had. Pine deftly walks the fine like between making Kirk his own character while still channeling little bits of Shatner here and there. Quinto’s barely in control Spock is just right given where the character is at this point in his life. Karl Urban does a great homage to DeForest Kelley without ever falling into parody. Simon Pegg is very funny as Scotty while still pulling off an engieering miracle or two. Anton Yelchin, while admittedly very young, makes for a very likable and capable Checkov without every going all Wesley Crusher on us. John Cho plays it pretty serious as Sulu but still gets to show off his prowess with the blade. Zoe Saldana, if anything, is almost too strong and too smart as Uhuru, as its hard to believe someone as apparently driven as her would be happy with just opening hailing frequencies.

– Leonard Nimoy is a class act all the way; his scenes with Pine, Pegg and Quinto were all entertaining and very moving and this longtime fan got choked up everytime he gave the Vulcan salute.

– Bruce Greenwood’s interpretation of Pike is very different from Jeffrey Hunter’s but a good fit for the needs of this movie. Its nice to see another capable captain in Starfleet.

– The design of the Enteprise and other ships is familiar yet different. I didn’t expect or want everything to look exactly like TOS as that would have seemed pointless to me. The special effects are also spectacular as the ships really seem to have mass to them.

– The music is very well done. Michael Giacchino gives us a heroic score with some memorable themes (something that is becoming rare these days). It would have been nice to hear some more musical cues from TOS, but the placement of the original theme at the end made up for that somewhat.

– The sound design was very nice, a good mix of new and recognizable classic Trek sound effects (everything from cooing tribbles to the transporter to the warp engines at maximum).

– While I found the destruction of Vulcan and the death of Amanda painful events to sit thru, I did understand their dramatic importance to the story. They served to tell us that there was real danger in this universe and that there were no guarantees that everything would turn out the same as it did before. That kind of tension was completely missing from the Star Wars prequels so I can understand why the filmmakers chose to do some of the things they did.

– Kirk’s rapid ascention to Captain really didn’t bother me. Given the events of the film, his pedigree (his father seems to be quite revered in this timeline) and Pike’s concerns that Starfleet was losing its edge, there was enough there for me to suspend my disbelief. Some men are born leaders, James T. Kirk is clearly such a man…in any universe.

What Could Have Been Better

– It would have been nice if Robau put up a bit of a fight on the Narada before biting the dust. Up until that point he had been the capable captain that Abrams & Co. were talking about but seemed pretty impotent right at the end.

– I could have done without young James Kirk trashing the Corvette to the “music” of the Beastie Boys. As it was, the scene had no context. I’d read that there was a scene where we discovered this was George Kirk’s car and Kirk’s uncle was planning to sell it. Including that would have at least given some motivation, rather than just giving us a rebellious brat.

– Nero’s lack of screen time robs him of gravitas and makes it difficult to understand his motivations. I read Countdown but, taken on its own merits, the movie really doesn’t give us a good enough picture of him and Ayel actually comes across as more menacing to me. Maybe the Rura Penthe scenes might have helped in this regard.

– A lot of people seem to be bothered by the Kobyashi Maru scene; personally I was disappointed by the scene that immediately follows it. After being chided by Spock about not understanding the purpose of the test, I was expecting Kirk to give him (and the audience) some speech about never giving up, never accepting death, and being willing to change the rules if that’s what it takes to win. Instead, he just stood there and looked down. Very uncharacteristic.

– The set design was disappointing. The bridge and transporter were adequate but the remaining Enterprise sets were really poor. Sickbay looked like a redressed version of the set from Enterprise (right down to the curtains); and the engineering room – in spite of the filmmakers stated intentions – just wasn’t convincing at all. It looked like a 20th century plant and removed me from the experience every time I layed eyes on it. The other sections of the Enterprise (such as where Uhuru was sitting when she’s first on the ship) were also unconvincing, looking like sections of a brewery with a few strategically placed colored pipes and the occasional console. For my money, ST:TMP was the high water mark of Trek production design with a look that mixed equal parts of functionality and “coolness”; the filmmakers would have been better off following that philosophy than trying to make it “feel real”.

– Spock’s romance with Uhuru really felt tacked on to me. There was no history to it; just a couple of scenes of them holding and kissing. It seemed more like a gratuitous moment, as if somebody somewhere reviewed the script and said “wait a minute, where’s the romance subplot?” While I have no problem with the relationship, it should have either been plotted out better or not explored at all.

– The only realy WTF? moment for me in the movie is that when the Narada lowers the drilling platform over Vulcan and Earth, why doesn’t some ship, plane or other vehicle simply fly up to the platform and blow it up? This is preceisely what Spock does in the jellyfish and I’m surprised that neither Vulcan nor Earth had any fighters or other interceptors to engage it. The writers should have plotted that contrivance a little better and given us a reason as to why the platform could only be approached via freefall from orbit.

I’ve been a fan of Trek for over 35 years and I for one was not bothered by the quasi-reboot and “canon violations” in this movie. In my mind, very little of what had been passed off as “Star Trek” over the last 15 years was worthwhile at all, so while it seems perfectly obvious to me that this movie happens in some parallel universe, I really have no problem with chucking continuity and starting fresh.

It’s looking more and more like this movie is going to be a hit and that bodes well for at least another sequel. I really like the cast and creative team now in place. At the end of the day, getting these characters right was their most important mandate and I think they succeeded in that regard. If we do get another film with this cast in this universe, I hope that we get another original story. Quite frankly, I really don’t want to see Khan or any other rehashes/reimaginations of classic episodes just yet. Give this new crew some original adventures and a chance to grow and breathe on their own.

It would also help if the filmmakers spend some money on improving the look of the sets; in spite of the movie’s stated budget, I can’t shake the feeling that the filmmakers were constrained by either time or money when it came to this movie’s look.

Bottom line for me: a very solid 8/10.

519. Robert Gillis - May 18, 2009

I’m reading tons of praise, some valid criticisms and some, shall we say, rants. But how long has it been since folks have been so PASSIONATE about Star Trek and their opinion of it. yeah, some folks just want to rant and others clearly didn’t see the movie, but there has been so much intelligent debate on both sides that I don’t miss this site. Surely, the best of times.

520. Robert Gillis - May 18, 2009

BTW, saw the movie again the other night, did anyone spot James Cawley? I saw Chris Doohan at the transporter (he is smiling!) but not Cawley.

521. TonyD - May 18, 2009

#520 – When Spock reappears on the bridge to inform Kirk & crew that Checkov’s plan to warp behind Saturn’s moon Titan is sound, you can see Cawley (who is looking a little star struck I might add :-) standing right next to Spock. He’s holding a clipboard, wearing a gold command tunic (quite appropriate) and his hair is a little shorter than in his own shows.

522. Dawn Cox - May 18, 2009

Gene Rodenbury is turning over in his grave with this movie. I was so excited to go and see it and as it went on, I kept expecting at the end that the timeline would be reset so that all of the series and movies would be legitimate. I am very disappointed with the franchise trying to bring young kids into the Star Trek experience with all of the special effects and the ‘stuff’ that they love. The original premise of Star Trek (social issues and a future that is positive) was totally forgotten with this film. I am crying!

523. SChaos1701 - May 18, 2009

522

Oh really? Did you know Gene Roddenberry when he was alive. Can you channel his spirit now to know what he thinks?

God forbid that new people get brought in and Star Trek gets a bigger fan base. Success is bad…..

Also, let’s get one thing straight. Star Trek was created as a space western. It was referred to as “a wagon train to the stars.” Gene did get his “vision” until the 80’s. That’s a little revisionist history on your part.

Also, here are a couple quotes from Gene that you might not have read.

“I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow’s things to tomorrow’s generations…”

“I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minds. I’d love someone to say, ‘Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry’s was nothing!’”

I can understand if you don’t like the movie, but please try not making stuff up to justify your views.

524. Chris Rod - May 18, 2009

I’ve watched it 4x’s . i have brought 10 people (combined) to the theaters. I have inspired 100 others (through myspace, co-workers, and friends) to go see the movie. who went. most of whom have seen it twice or desire to see it again. i still have 5 other people to take to watch the movie with again!

THE MOST POWERFULL SCENEs (to me):

the first 56 seconds of Jim Kirk’s life is the last 56 seconds of his father/ George Kirks life… he is there on the com the whole time. discussing the name of the child. and as he tells her “i love you!” he knows hes going to die.. jsut to save her and his son.. he plunges to his death! George Kirks (helmsworth) expressions, Winonna Kirks expression, Jim as a baby, Giaccino’s score.. WOW! my heart just felt so hollow! .. then. INTRO SCREEN -“STAR TREK” .. …all that flashed in my mind was EPIC!! this movie is EPIC! with large pride! ..
NOW MY FRIENDS KNOW WHY IVE LOVED STAR TREK ALL MY LIFE!

the loss of Spocks mother Amanda…..wow.. that was brilliantly written.. everyone got sucked into the emotion the thought of that death…that loss….. incredible tradgedy….shakespeare knew tradgedy.. star trek was a shakespeare’s play in space. and this was TRADGEDY! reality. A TOTAL EPIC FILM!

The victory in the end!
Pine as Kirk… it just works! i love Chris Pine now.
McCOY IS KARL URBAN.. or excuse me! .. Karl Urban IS McCoy! :)
SPOCK! … !!! SPOCK! QUINTO=SPOCK!

I love this movie! i can not wait to see it again! lets push for a STRONG 3RD WEEKEND!!!! DESPITE TERMINATOR!

:)

525. Chris Rod - May 18, 2009

9.9/10

(THE ONNLLLLYYYYYYY PROBLEM I HAVE WITH IT IS: DELTA VEGA. THE PLANNET BEING THE ADJACENT PLANET TO VULCAN.. THAT WAS JSUT PATHETIC.. TO ME .. HE COULDVE WATCHED IT FROM A VIEW SCREEN OR SOMETHING…..) – but even then.. Orci/gang explained that its not really the Delta Vega in WNMHGB, but its a different plannet with a name Star Trek is familiar with.

spock with Uhura is ok…. Spock is young and hasnt fully developed fighting off his human emotions.. he needed love, he got it fro Uhura.. this (most likely) eventually stop as he gets older.

526. Elizabeth Giangrego - May 18, 2009

It’s fairly obvious from Star Trek The Reboot that the new approach is to ignore everything that went before including logic and good story telling.

Obviously long time Star Trek fans, by virtue of their age, are not the target audience and Orci and company assume, probably correctly, that the new attention deficit audience is not interested in logical character development nor is he bound by the boundaries of established characters.

Why else would they choose a Korean actor to play Mr. Sulu? Did Mr. Abrams not know the difference? Doesn’t he care that there is a difference? Or did he assume that one Asian looks pretty much like another.

Apparently the writers do not know, do not care, or assume we are all too stupid to know that Bones gets his nickname from “sawbones,” a pejorative nickname for physician. So we get this stupid line about how McCoys wife took everything but his bones. Now, that’s intelligent. The actor does a fine impersonation of DeForest Kelly, but that’s not what we wanted.

Depriving Kirk of his father is one thing, setting him out on a highway in a vintage Corvette is quite another. How stupid do viewers have to be that they cannot understand a hotroding kid when they see one. Couldn’t he have taken to the road in something new and sleek? Did he have to come to a screeching halt at the precipice of the largest quarry known to man (I assume it was a quarry and not some little known Iowa canyon).

I understand the need to have a bar fight because it’s much easier to write a bar fight than it is to write exposition. And I am willing to swallow the whole Kirk as a rebel with a cause because I understand this is Star Wars: The Reboot. But gee, would it have been asking too much to get the young, brash Academy student to the helm of the Enterprise with a modicum of common sense?

Why couldn’t Orci simply fade out on the whole Kirk cheating thing (which, by the way was NEVER discovered at the Academy), put in a bumper card that says “10 years later,” and we have the more adult, more seasoned Lt. Kirk reporting for duty on the Enterprise.

The writers could have gotten to the same end with some finesse and intelligence, assuming that having finesse and talent–and I doubt it from what I’ve seen.

But now we get to the point that sent me and some of the people in the audience right up the wall: Spock and Ohura. Oh, please, what was THAT? Yes, the writer’s have just killed his plant and allowed Spock’s mother to slip through his fingers. So far, so good. What they could have done which would have added to the pathos, added to the tension and made his final melt-down so much better: Ohura, who apparently thinks nothing of throwing herself at a superior office while they are both on duty, approaches Spock to give him that full body hug the writer’s claimed Spock needed. How much better: Spock almost embraces her but then remembers who he is and who she is and gently but strongly rejects her. Now, under these circumstances Spock is wrapped so tightly you can hear him vibrate and he is ripe for a full melt-down when goaded by Kirk.

And, if you want to, you can go back at some point and have Spock interact with Uhura.

But instead, we get a whining, tearful Spock who is so completely out of character that he goes in for the lunge. OK, I understand the primal need for all good school boys to see Vulcan sex, but it’s just wrong here.

And then Spock maroons Kirk on an ice planet to complete the similarities to Star Wars in case anyone missed what was going on. But he fortuitously runs into Spock Prime, who has all the answers, and Scotty, for good measure.

But, for no earthly reason, Scotty is sent through a Willie Wonka-like tube ride. This is amusing. One should laugh. Unless one is struck dumb by the whole charade.

In the end, the bridge of the Enterprise looks like Bring You Kid To Space Day, and the crew resembles nothing less than frat boys with a cool ride.

The new, improved, louder and more bombastic Star Trek is clearly designed for some other audience than one that thinks and wants a good story. Abrams could have presented a solid reboot had he cared enough about the original story or if he had better writers. But as long as it blows up, I guess that’s all that matters.

I left the theater feeling depressed and dejected. I did not feel as if I had seen a Star Trek movie but rather some strange, pallid combination of Star Wars and Star Trek.

I know Abrams and crew do not want the old audience. They’ve made that clear. Now that this film is the highest grossing in the franchise, we will have more of the same. I’m sure the 10-year-olds at who this is aimed are thrilled.

527. SChaos1701 - May 18, 2009

526

Uh….yeah….Sulu was not supposed to be Japanese. Even George Takei said that Sulu was supposed to be a representation of ALL Asia. Next time please get your facts straight before you make completely inaccurate assumptions.

Too bad you don’t know what you’re talking about.

528. SChaos1701 - May 18, 2009

By the way, it’s UHURA not OHURA. Are you completely pulling this out of your a**.

529. Doug L. - May 18, 2009

Tony D….

Nice Review, nails my sentiments exactly. Doug L.

530. Dawn Cox - May 18, 2009

SChaos1701 – May 18, 2009
You have no idea about what you are talking about.
Enough said.

531. sean - May 18, 2009

#522

The original premise of Star Trek was to be entertaining, period. Oh, and to make Gene Rodenberry some money :)

532. SChaos1701 - May 18, 2009

531

Exactly!

533. rpoe0728 - May 18, 2009

*Spoilers below* … I write this as an old Trekkie. The new movie is action-packed, interesting, has some character moments, and the special effects are great. I can handle the “alternate reality” as I have renamed the movie “Star Trek Version 2.” I cannot handle the constant lens flares, the constantly moving camera, and the inconsistent look of the Enterprise interiors, with the engine room really being a brewery in real life, and the rest being an Apple store. I have followed its development, and understand what JJ was going for. I do think it needed to allow more time for the audience to “catch its breath” during the course of the movie. I was worn out, it was so frenetic. I highly recommend reading the prequel comics to get the backstory. I admire the many nods to TOS and what came after, and think Trekkies should go see this. Rate it 7 out of 10.

534. jfstepro - May 18, 2009

INFO
I just attended Wonderfest in Louisville and a Design Artist who got to work on the new movie made a presentation. He said the studio was not giving JJ any budget at first so they had to use a brewery for the engine room. Later as the studio saw some of the movie they provided the funds necessary. This explains some of the high tech and low tech in the same movie. Since this Artist had done previous art for Trek he got rejected at first. He said they did not want anyone from the past to work on it. They wanted a fresh approach. Later they called him in. He had slides of shuttle variations and Klingon ship variations he presented to them.

OPINION
I am a long time fan and I loved this movie and thank goodness we have a new movie to watch. Since it is doing well we will have future Star Trek to look forward to. It may not be perfect and may not fit the old universe but it breathed new life into a corpse. Stop living in the past. If you really listened to the ideals you’d be looking for a positive future. I just read the book and it clearly is an alternate time line that was created by these events. Maybe this will get through. Go out and try to make this movie yourself then judge someone who actually fought for it and got it done in the real world.

535. captain_neill - May 19, 2009

516

I know the original time line is still intact

I was making that clear to people who aren’t getting it

536. Christina - May 20, 2009

In comparison to the original series and The Next Generation, I give this movie a 5/10.

It is commercially viable and definitely a movie for the masses. It was very entertaining, the acting was good (especially Karl Urban and Leonard Nimoy) and the special effects were impressive. However, I had such respect for Gene Roddenberry’s vision and for not compromising his vision to appeal to the masses that J.J. Abrams’ decisions and deviations are disturbing to me. He has compromised what makes Star Trek special.

The acting was good. I especially enjoyed Nimoy’s older version of Spock. He portrayed a mature Spock who had come to terms with his humanity and Vulcan background. *MAJOR SPOILER*: That being said, I was extremely disturbed at the destruction of Vulcan and Spock’s mother. It seems that J.J. has issues with this peaceful culture born from a violent past that now controls its emotions. He constantly throws Vulcan emotions at us. He provides windows to young Spock’s and Sarek’s emotions. Spock’s physical and emotional outburst and his relationship with Uhura is a complete diversion from the intention of the original series. I enjoyed the scene with child-Spock as it is a reference to “Journey to Babel”; however, the bullies were not consistent with an emotion-controlled society. Spock is does not fully reconcile his relationship with his father until The Next Generation – and that was only because it was done through Picard. J.J. fixes their relationship in a 2hr. time period. I don’t feel this gives justice to the complexities of this relationship or the Vulcan culture.

There was also too much gratuitous action. It was distracting. There were moments when the comedy was good because they were situations that long term fans can recognize and appreciate, knowing the characters’ traits and personalities.

537. sean - May 20, 2009

Just saw it for the 3rd time. I swear, I’ve rarely seen a film that improves with every viewing in the way this one does.

538. SChaos1701 - May 20, 2009

536

Spock’s physical and emotional outburst and his relationship with Uhura is a complete diversion from the intention of the original series.

The original intention was for Spock to have emotions which he did in the first episode. Plus he had emotional and sometimes violent outbursts. Thanks for playing.

539. Jefferies Tuber - May 20, 2009

After reading some of the troll posts here, I am compelled to remind people of some of the soul-crushing lameness in the holy of holies: TWOK.

1. Kirk-McCoy scene is a direct rip-off of The Cage pilot.
2. What exactly is with the dry ice effect when Kirk ends Saavik’s KM test?
3. Kirk has a snotty, blonde and curly haired, so who is gayer than a Mazda Miata.
4. The stunning soundstage cinematography of Ceti Alpha 5.
5. The infamous Khan-Chekov scene.
6. Khan’s crew, which looks like they were cast from a modern dance troupe.
7. Khan’s anachronistic TWOK-era Starfleet belt buckle.
8. Piss-poor production value, it’s a very small movie.
9. Scotty bringing his dead nephew to the bridge.

Stop glorifying TWOK. It’s like politicians with Kennedy or Reagan… it only serves to make gods out of men and diminish the hard work of a younger generation. I love The Wrath of Khan, but it’s just as flawed and requires no less suspension of disbelief than any other installment. What it has is RIcardo Montalban and one of the greatest death scenes of all time. Ship, out of danger? Makes me weep every time.

Amazing that people on this board will write a treatise about beaming off Delta Vega or the lighting on the bridge but have no problem with an energy weapon [conveniently the size of a human on a transporter] that can shape a planet in a matter of minutes.

540. Jefferies Tuber - May 20, 2009

God bless the soul of Ricardo Montalban. I wouldn’t want my purposeful hyperbole above to be misunderstood. May we all be blessed with Ricardo’s pecs.

“Genesis, what’s that?”

541. ptama - May 21, 2009

I saw it again for the second time: This is a very enjoyable film and I plan to get the Blue ray when it comes out. I think some folks on this site are way to sanative about breech of Canon. “How cares”. It’s science fiction. It does not have to always make sense. Pick any Trek film and you can find plot holes so bit you could pilot the Enterprise though them. Let me throw this out for everyone to ponder: Spock prime is the only one in that time line who knows how to go back in time intentionally. He’s done it on several occasions sometimes accidentally, some times out of necessity. If he could figure out how to go back in time to save earth from a whale probe, using an old beat up Klingon ship. He most certain could go back in time to save his home planet from destruction, he know how to do it.

What I liked:
-Overall great entertainment!
-Great cast
-Kelvin’s Captain
-Seeing how the characters meet for the first time.
-Great McCoy rendition

What I did not like:
-Vague reference to Weatherboarding. When they were torturing Captain Pike.
-Various Plot holes.
-Set inconsistencies

All in all a great start to a new set of movies,

542. SChaos1701 - May 21, 2009

539

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

543. Christina - May 21, 2009

Since this movie is an obvious set-up to an entirely new franchise, maybe saving Vulcan will be one of the subsequent plots to get more money out of us. I’m glad they didn’t attempt it in this movie. It would have made it longer.

544. nervalaIII - May 22, 2009

There’s been a lot of talk about product placement and the shameful use of it in the new Star Trek movie. I don’t get all the hullabaloo. I don’t recall anyone raising such issues with the movie, “2001,” most notably the PanAm shuttle. I actually sort of like a reasonable amount of appropriate product placement. It ties that vision of the future with the here and now. Do folks think there will be no companies in the future or what?
Come on, get over it.

545. Robert Gillis - May 22, 2009

I posted this on memory alpha this week:

Cameos and guest appearances in the film

* James Cawley, creator and star of “Star Trek: Phase II,” is standing to Spock’s right (screen left) when Spock enters the bridge and approves Chekov’s plan to hide the Enterprise behind Titan.

* Chris Doohan, son of James Doohan, is sitting at the transporter console when Scotty beams Spock, Kirk and Pike back aboard the Enterprise.

* Greg Grunberg, star of “Heroes” and one of director J. J. Abrams’ closest friends, appears in the film as the voice of young Kirk’s angry step-father early in the film.

* Uncredited, William Morgan Sheppard, who played the warden at Rura Penthe in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, plays the Vulcan elder who speaks to Spock of his “disadvantage” of having a human mother.

546. Robert Gillis - May 22, 2009

539 – I saw TWOK the day it came out in 1982. On VHS and DVD, in 25 years I’ve seen it over 100 times. It was recognized as great BACK THEN. Ignoring lameness and inconsistencies if are easier when you have a superlative script and a cohesive, strong story, which TWOK had.

To your points:
1. Kirk-McCoy scene is a direct rip-off of The Cage pilot.
–Tru Dat, but the scene still works. And in TWOK, Kirk was more in a funk (or mid-life crisis).

2. What exactly is with the dry ice effect when Kirk ends Saavik’s KM test?
–Um, she destroyed the ship. The Kobayashi Maru scenario frequently wreaks havoc with students and equipment.

3. Kirk has a snotty, blonde and curly haired, so who is gayer than a Mazda Miata.
–A lot of people didn’t like the charter of David but Watch the personal attacks. The ACTOR died far too young.

4. The stunning soundstage cinematography of Ceti Alpha 5.
–Agreed

5. The infamous Khan-Chekov scene.
— What about it? gave Koenig a great part and the scene works.

6. Khan’s crew, which looks like they were cast from a modern dance troupe.
— Cannot argue that.

7. Khan’s anachronistic TWOK-era Starfleet belt buckle.
–Ditto, that was a goof.

8. Piss-poor production value, it’s a very small movie.
— No way – The studio mandate was more with less — and due to the story it worked. production values (for 1982) were exceptional.

9. Scotty bringing his dead nephew to the bridge.
— Agreed it made no sense but dramatically, MAN it was an effective moment.

TWOK has its problems and its plot holes but they got most everything else right.

547. sean - May 22, 2009

#541

Weatherboarding? Haha

548. ptama - May 22, 2009

541

“Water boarding”, I meant water boarding, Haha

Even 250 years form now they’re still using water boarding? That was a weird scene. Not sure what the reason for the water was

549. Aubrey Neiswender - May 24, 2009

Okay, so my rank on a scale would probably have been 9/10.

I honestly went into this movie not wanting to see it because I really hated Kirk in the original movies and show. I was all, oh they’re not going to show enough of my favorite characters.. but I was pleasantly surprised. I had even stayed away from it long enough, until last night, that I didn’t even know who was playing in it besides Spock and Kirk. Speaking of which I was insanely happy in my pants that Simon was playing Scott~

Anyway, So I went into the theater with my fiance and we bought the tickets, much to my fear. We’ve both inherited Star Trek from our parents, and even though we’re not old enough to have seen the original series when it first was out we saw it plus all of the many incarnations there after of it. But, I digress, again.. Anyway! I watched the movie. I’ve said that about a thousand times.. We sat down and my butt went numb.

My fiance cried at the first sequence before the Star Trek logo even went across the screen, and I’ll admit that it was sad, but It wasn’t that bad. Seriously, why cry at that? I guess I’m just a heartless monster, but I’ll move on. So, It showed childhoods of the two main characters and I’ll admit that was kind of cool, but still.. I wasn’t really that interested in it. It moved on to show more stuff and at that point I could feel that my butt had gone numb. Then *Finally* it got to some good parts. Kirk getting his butt kicked repetitivly.. ect. I saw quite a few scenes that made the movie well worth while.

And, if I don’t get flamed for this, I thought all the actors and actresses did awesomely. Granted some of the story line was a little “WTF?” for me, but they mentioned in there that it was an alternate time line. So, seeing as it was an AU I can totally see this films credibility as something from the Star Trek universe’s plethora of time lines and story arcs. And hey, it was better than sitting though just one episode of Voyager.

Also, Anton playing Chekov had me very happy in my pants.. also, Simon as scotty.. HELL YES! I love both of those actors now even more so. ^_^

550. SChaos1701 - May 24, 2009

549

“And, if I don’t get flamed for this, I thought all the actors and actresses did awesomely.”

You shouldn’t get flamed. They were awesome. I’m now of the opinion that ANYONE who didn’t like this movie is a moron.

551. Capt/. MiXael - May 24, 2009

9 out of 10

nice start for the new timeline

552. Schiefy - May 25, 2009

Music: 7 out of 10.

Reason: in surveying the comments on the music I sense that most people are on the extremes–they have totally embraced it or reject it because it doesn’t have some classic Trek theme interwoven at appropriate spots. I came to the movie expecting it to be different without trying to capture every nuance from TOS including the music but…after discussion with my sons I realized that while it seems to appeal to them just fine I was disappointed because the “theme” is simply not memorable enough for me. As Simon might say on American Idol, “it was forgetable.”

When you stop and survey all the great movie music over the years there is always a theme that you remember beyond the movie (i.e., James Bond, 2001, Godfather, Jaws, Close Encounters, Raiders, Star Wars, Somewhere in Time, etc.). While some themes might be more understated than some I just mentioned, you usually recognize a good, memorable theme immediately upon hearing it even if you only saw a movie just once. In Star Trek I just couldn’t find a theme that I walked out of the theater humming or a certainty that the next time I heard it I could say it was STAR TREK like some of the past themes dating back to TOS which was the only great thing about the movie for me when I heard Courage’s theme at the end–that I remembered!

I am hopeful that more definite theme(s) will be found in the sequel but I am not expecting old themes interwoven (as nostalgic as that would be–but this is a new generation) into the new. I just want another memorable Star Trek theme I can hum in the shower or put on my cell phone’s ringtone!

553. Morgan - May 25, 2009

So, Star Trek fans spend the last 4 decades learning the backstory of the characters and the setting, and then a movie is finally made about it and it TOTALLY DISREGARDS everything we’ve been told. Then they use the convenient excuse that it’s a time travel/alternate universe thing. Whoopee. If they weren’t going to use the established ST history, why even bother to use the ST characters? It could have been any movie with this plot, not a ST movie. The sad part is that a really excellent Academy story already existed: the book by William Shatner of all people, and all they had to do was turn that into a screenplay and it would have been a much better, more suitable plot than the one they used. The actors were terrific — sometimes I had to remind myself that Karl Urban’s Dr. McCoy wasn’t really the young original — but they (and the fans, and the franchise) deserved a more relevant story. Keep SOME of the history we’ve been fed, re Kirk’s family, Romulans, Spock/Uhura (WTF??), Enterprise crew, etc. We didn’t want to see an alternate universe, we wanted to see the history of the ST universe we know.

554. SChaos1701 - May 25, 2009

553

“We didn’t want to see an alternate universe, we wanted to see the history of the ST universe we know.”

Speak for yourself. Too bad you’re WRONG!

555. Billy Bobby - May 25, 2009

554

Speak for yourself. Too bad you’re WRONG!

Speak for yourself because you’re WRONG! I just wanna shake the people who like this so-called “movie” and find out what the Hell is wrong with them.

556. MacKenzie - May 25, 2009

I’m a Vampire lover overall, and Science Fiction isn’t really my thing. My Dad had to drag me to see the movie, and while I was watching it, I was literally sitting on the edge of my seat and stuffing popcorn in my mouth thinking, “No! Don’t Do it, Spock!” (Spock dazzles me *_*.)(Major Twilight fan xD) Anyway, I didn’t want to leave the theatre. It took all of my energy to get out of that seat.. i swear. Now, i’ve been watching Star Trek and my twilight-plasterd-walls are slowly progressing in to being plastered with Spock, and other various Star Trek stuff. (Haha, Scoot over Edward Cullen!)

557. SChaos1701 - May 25, 2009

555

I’m wrong? I guess that makes me one of the millions that are. Apparently, you’re in the Vocal Minority and you’ve already read what I think of people who don’t like this movie. So just go home, get into your William Shatner underoos, watch your TOS DVDs and have your mommy tuck you in nice and tight. Let the real, TRUE fans of Star Trek post here, not the obviously brainwashed, unkempt, anti-social nerds whose closest thing to a girlfriend they have is watching the fan dance from STV on repeat.

558. mikeyboy - May 26, 2009

SChaos 1701 – Probably the most sane person posting on here and I’m in full agreement!

559. mikeyboy - May 26, 2009

Oh and by the way guys, for all of you pissed off about the Spock/Uhura relationship: Roddenberry WAS originally going to have Spock and Uhura forming a close relationship but the execs at the studio forbade it.So this movie justifiably puts Roddenberrys original idea back in the frame and is a very nice touch by the writers.

560. T. Allen - May 26, 2009

First, let me state up front that I am not a fan of J.J. Abrams. I do like to watch “Fringe” , but only because the stories are interesting (made so by an excellent cast). As to the new Star Drek (not a typo), I’m not as enamored as so many seem to be. Yes, Karl Urban is excellent as McCoy. And while Zachary Quinto certainly looked the part, It was a bit weird hearing Spock speak with a lisp (I’ve not heard anyone address this). This isn’t a knock against the actor (or anyone with a speech impediment), but it is distracting. And what’s the deal with Spock and Uhura “sucking face” whenever they have a moment alone together? I thought Vulcans were supposed to be in control of themselves. Yeah, I know Spock is half human, but the half-human part seems to be out of control through a big portion of the movie. Or is this a result of this being an alternate time-line story? If that’s the case, it would have been more interesting to portray Spock as he was in “Mirror Mirror” (one of my favorite episodes). Chris Pine’s “Kirk” is just a bit too cocky ( oh well, it could’ve been worse. What if J.J. got Tom Cruise for the part? Yikes!! Talk about a cocky James Kirk!) Simon Pegg’s portrayal of Scotty was off-target too. I’ll bet James Doohan is turning over in his grave. And nearly every time there’s a location change, do we really need a title appearing at the top of the screen (ala “Fringe”) telling us where we are (Iowa, Vulcan, Starfleet Academy, Stinky’s Bait Shop, etc.)? And the Enterprise just didn’t “feel” right either. The bridge is way too brightly lit, engineering looks more like the inside of a water-treatment plant, even the exterior of the ship isn’t quite right. (Okay, alternate time-line, alternate Enterprise, blah,blah,blah). Yeah, the special effects are cool (amazing what the folks at ILM can do) , but overall I’d have to give this movie a 6 out of 10. And please, Paramount, don’t bring J.J. Abrams back to do the (inevitable) sequels. How about Leonard Nimoy (or anyone from the original series with directorial skills) to direct the sequels? And write a script that will fix the mess that’s been made in this latest incarnation and give us something to cheer about. Sorry Trek nerds, but I just don’t share your enthusiasm about this movie. It’s okay, but it’s not great. BTW, I’ve heard that Chris Pine is one of the actors being considered for the role of “Green Lantern” in the upcoming movie (of the same name). After seeing his performance in “Star Trek”, I think he might be better suited for that than as James Kirk, in my opinion. Live long and prosper.

561. SChaos1701 - May 26, 2009

560

I love how you say that James Doohan is turning over in his grave when his own son has posted here many times saying the opposite.

No Paramount, don’t bring back Abrams. He’s only making Star Trek economically viable. No, please bring back Berman and let’s have movies that don’t break even and get panned by critics and fans. Please Paramount don’t bring in new fans. We’re just happy having maladjusted nerds speak for us whose idea of a good Trek movie is James Cawley’s terrible acting that makes me both want to laugh and cry at it’s absurdity. Please Paramount, listed to T. Allen. Better yet bring him on to direct the sequel. He’ll do sooooo much better.

To paraphrase the great Steve Wilkos. Star Trek is a moron-free franchise and you’re not allowed to watch. Have a nice day and drive through please.

562. ss - May 26, 2009

So I finally saw the film. I found it very enjoyable; the intro was outstanding, much of the acting was superb, the effects were excellent, Nimoy was wonderful, Kirk hung off various cliffs like a champ. I especially liked the humanity of the characters – unlike, say, Voyager, these characters can express emotions other than grim determination. I also felt it had a few problems – (1) felt like they cut a little too much in an effort to get down to 2 hrs, (2) the vaguely anti-intellectual and moderately dickish nature of Kirk’s rise to command, (3) the rapid promotions and coincidental meetings, (4) some of the science seemed a little dodgy, and (5) I wasn’t thrilled by the score. All of this has been extensively discussed above, so I don’t feel like it’s worth getting into now.

I’m just very happy that this film has gone over well and that we’ll get some additional films. This movie felt like an appetizer, and I’m ready for the main course. I only hope that the writers remember that – (1) Star Trek is about exploration, which might be violent but doesn’t have to be, and (2) Star Trek II is a great film, but not every great film has to be Star Trek II.

563. T. Allen - May 26, 2009

Just out of curiosity SChaos1701, which postings are those of James Doohan’s son? I’ve scrolled back through all of the postings and I can’t tell. Apparently, if anyone in any way criticizes this film, doesn’t give it a 10 out of 10, and doesn’t think it’s the best “Trek” movie ever, that just ruffles your feathers to no end. Let me reiterate, I am not a fan of J.J. Abrams. That’s not to say that he’s a bad director, or that I could do a better job, I just don’t happen to care for his style of directing, Are there other directors that could do worse? Of course. But there are other directors that could have done better. Like it or not, I stand by my critique. If by not fawning over this movie makes me a “maladjusted nerd” or a “moron”, so be it. As an action movie, it was okay (not great). Had I never seen any Star Trek television program or feature film based on any of the series, and this was my first introduction to the franchise, then I might have a higher opinion, since I would have nothing to compare it to. So I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on how great or not so great this movie is.

564. SChaos1701 - May 26, 2009

563

Chris Doohan has spoken about this throughout the whole of this blog. I’ll take a Doohan’s word over how well Jimmy would or wouldn’t have liked it.

It ruffles my feathers because those people are wrong.

565. captain_neill - May 27, 2009

563

I dont like JJ Abrams either but I admit hands down he did a great movie and kept the spirit of Trek alive in the new movie.

I loved the film, but he still did a few things I did not agree with. However, to me this is not the best ever Star Trek film and it seems to make a statement like this is heresy, which it is not meant to be. I am stating that although I loved the film I believe that TWOK, First Contact and TUC are much beter films.

THe more I think about engineering the more I don’t like it, When you see engineering in the Kelvin ahen Robau walks up steps to get to a shuttle, I swear to you I saw a brick wall. Now seeing a brickwall took me out of the illusion that this was meant to be on a starship as a starship would not have a brick wall. Alsoin one other scene it seem too big for the scale of the ship. Now I have no problems making engineering a little bit more industrial, prefer it to be like it was done in the past but if this is the way for it to go then my advice is to disguise it better so it feels like a starship.

Just remember not everyfan will not like this film but that does not mean that they are any less of a Star Trek fan. God I think sometimes this site can be too elitiest.

I bet I will be penalised for sayin that this was not my all time favourite and the fact that even the Kelvin at the start is in an alternative timeline in my books as well.

Just remember I loved the film, I just treat it as separate from the rest of Trek, which I also love. Kapesh!

566. elaine n - May 27, 2009

Saw it last night. I LOVED it. Absolutely a 10. The writers, producers and directors nailed it.
Great casting. Left wide open for more. But am I correct in remembering that Spock’s mother did not die?

567. T. Allen - May 27, 2009

Again, SChaos1701, I will ask you, which postings are those of Chris Doohan? Please be specific, as I am most curious to go back and reread them, although it doesn’t necessarily mean that I will agree with everything that he says. Now on to a few points that I didn’t mention earlier (and I suppose you’ll be just as argumentitive about these as well). While it is obvious that Zachary Quintos looks the part to play Spock, and Karl Urban nailed McCoy perfectly, Chris Pine’s portrayal of Kirk, and Simon Pegg’s portayal of Scotty were less than stellar. John Cho’s portayal of Sulu was okay (although it’s difficult not to think of George Takei), and Anton Yelchin’s portrayal of Chekov, albeit brief, was good, but I thought his Russian accent was a little strong compared to Walter Koenig’s. Had it not been established that Chris Pine was supposed to be Kirk, he could easily have been any red-shirted cadet fresh out of Star-Fleet Academy that would have been killed off within the first 30 minutes of any regular T.V. episode of Star Trek. Simon Pegg lacked many of the nuances that made James Doohan’s Scotty such a lovable and memorable character. I found it difficult to care much about this version of Scotty. In this alternate time-line story, he could just as easily have drowned while swooshing around inside the large water pipes. While it would have been sad, it would have had about the same impact as Spock’s mother being killed off. Which brings me to Winona Ryder as Amanda Grayson. While there are no doubt a huge number of Winona Ryder fans, she just can’t compare to Jane Wyman. So, while it was a bit disconcerting to see Spock’s mother get killed, no great loss to those of us who are not Winona Ryder fans. Eric Bana as the Romulan Captain Nero was very entertaining, much better than his portrayal of Bruce Banner/ The Hulk.Unfortunately, he lacks Ricardo Montalban’s charisma and his Nero isn’t quite as memorable as Montalban’s Khan. Zoe Saldna’s portrayal of Uhura was okay. She’s cute, but not classy like Nichelle Nichols. If this movie makes as much money for Paramount as I suspect it will, then perhaps in the subsequent sequels more can be spent on sets and props than was obviously spent on this film. Let us hope so. As to the script, if you go along with the alternate time-line story, then I guess you have to keep an open mind and not be too judgemental about the flaws in this reboot (or rebirth) story of Star Trek. And since there probably are going to be subsequent sequels, I guess we’ll have to get used to Zachary Quinto’s Spock speaking with a lisp. Who knows? Maybe it’ll provide something else for McCoy to banter about. “Thpock calling Enterprizth. Come in Enterprizth.” “Jim! Tell Bonzth to thstop making fun of me.” “Phazersths on thstun!” “Live long and prosthper!” Too bad Saturday Night Live is on summer hiatus. The cast would definitely have fun parodying this new movie. Makes me want to see the now classic parody with John Belushi as Kirk and Chevy chase as Spock. Now that was funny! And to you, SChaos1701, have a nice day and don’t take yourself (or this movie) so seriously. After all, it’s just a movie.
Adequate at best, but not great.

568. SChaos1701 - May 27, 2009

567

When you say stupid stuff like calling it Star Drek, you’re going to get an earful. Mostly because I just think when people act that base, they’re just doing it for attention.

If you want to read what Chris Doohan has said, just look throughout this website. I won’t do your research. It’s all there. Just sift through the comments.

It is funny how you’re views on the movie moderated after I called you out.

569. Keith Murray - May 27, 2009

I I just finished watching “Star Trek”. I DO NOT recommend this film to any one. Not only is it an insult to the past 40 plus years of continuity of the entire Trek universe, it is another appalling example of the death of cinema.

JJ Abrams uses the cameras in a way that not only confuses the audience, but actually causes dizziness. The Camera flies in such a rapid speed, complete with flips and spins the viewer feels like an unwilling passenger on a second rate roller coaster. What ever clear images accidently appear on film are then completely obscured by “dramatic” lens flair.

As for the writing, I expected a great deal more from a Star Trek film. The usual Human drama has been replaced with your average lack luster Summer Hollywood nonsense. In the Comparison to all other Trek Films and T.V. Series this one is just “Things go boom”

Now as for the idea that this is an alternative reality, and that the events of any series of film that has come before do not apply is something that I can accept. However this dose not explain why the writers and producers felt it necessary to reduce beloved iconic characters to mere caricatures of themselves.

As a Life long fan of the original series, I was excited by the idea of “Current Era” Spock meeting “Past Kirk”. When I saw how the character of Spock was portrayed, I had to pinch myself. I could not Believe that this was in fact Leonard Nimoy.
The manor in witch Spock talks to the other players, as if he were running a day care center, was just appalling. Watching him repeat lines that had great meaning in past films in this film strips those lines of any and all sentiment.

My over all review rating 1/10. Save your Money.

570. T. Allen - May 27, 2009

I never intended for this to become an ongoing dialogue with you, SChaos1701, or anyone else that has posted on here. I, like everyone else that has the right to do so, wanted to present my own critique and rating on this film. My views have not moderated in the least. As I previously stated, it is at best an adequate addition to the Star Trek franchise. If it bothers you that I call it “Star Drek” , get over it (and no, I’m not calling it that for attention). Obviously we’re not going to see eye to eye on this. I’ve tried a couple of times to call you out on your claim that Chris Doohan has posted on this site, but apparently you cannot offer proof. I have read through the postings and cannot find any such evidence. So either I somehow overlooked it, or you’re just blowing smoke. I didn’t ask you to do my research, just offer proof. Apparently your views have moderated, or you’d have stated your disagreements to my additional review/comments about this film. As I scrolled back through the postings trying to find Chris Doohan’s comments, I did notice that after every posting that was the least bit negative, you responded quite vociferously. I can’t help but wonder if you are connected to this film in some way, as a cast or crew member, or maybe you work for Paramount. And if so, that’s okay. Just remember that not everyone who sees this film is going to think it’s as great as you seem to think it is. Yes, there does seem to be a lot of positive response to this film, but there are obviously others that feel as I do, that this could have been a really great movie, but it came up short. Too bad all of that “red matter” was destroyed sending Nero and his crew into a black hole. It would have been great if Spock could have held some in reserve to pass along to Picard and his crew to send the Borg into a black hole. Now that’s a story arc that we could all follow and cheer for! Oops, I may have just given the folks at Paramount an idea for a future script idea. Paramount, you’re welcome. Just send me a check.

571. SChaos1701 - May 27, 2009

569

Hey buddy, it’s “which” not “witch.” But that’s only the smallest of your inaccuracies.

572. David Holmes - May 27, 2009

Man, I read all the previous slams of the new S.T. movie on this blog, and even tossed aside the hackneyed sayings from young trekkers ( I am really of the first generation – fans of Star Trek from the sixties), saying “It’s not your father’s Star Trek”, before going to see the movie. So I went the other night when it wasn’t too crowded, and saw it. Damn, it was really good! I thought Abrahms did a phenomenal job in subtly layering the past characteristics of the main characters with youthful actors of the present. The music evoked good drama, the scenes spectacular ( especially the Enterprise coming out of the orange methane haze of Saturn’s moon Titan, which was as real as it gets thanks to Carolyn Porco’s images from the Cassini satellite currently orbiting Saturn) in other words what’s not to love. Look when I see a new Trek film I don’t want a religious experience I just want to be entertained in a proper Star Trek atmosphere, and this movie did exactly that. No it’s not your father’s Star Trek… it’s better, and by the way in the next Star Trek movie let’s get Carolyn Porco in it as part of the crew. She would make one heck of a science officer.

573. Zack - May 27, 2009

571
Lol. I’m not trying to get involved pal, but if you’re going to critique someone’s grammar, you better proofread post 568. “You’re” is a contraction. “Your” implies possession….Nicholas Meyer should have directed Star Trek. At least it would have had substance. JJ’s version is about as thick as condensed chicken broth. Rating 2/10.

574. Zack - May 27, 2009

A quick note about the music for people that care for such things-
Call me crazy but the main theme had too many arpeggiated figures and quarter note triplets for it not to be a nod to the original. The end theme is pretty cool, as he combines his new music with the old. It’s there but you have to listen for it. Everything in the middle felt like felt filler, but that seems to be M Giacchino’s style as of late, save for his Medal of Honor scores. Case in point: listen to Speed Racer’s OST. He saves it all for the end, and it’s sweet.

575. SChaos1701 - May 28, 2009

573

Yeah…JJ did a bad job. I guess there’s no accounting for taste.

576. SChaos1701 - May 28, 2009

570

If you actually look through this site, you’ll see Chris Doohan posting here. If you can’t accept that or actually look through this site then there’s nothing I can do for you. It’s all here. Just look through the site. But you’re too busy bashing the movie to do anything of real substance here.

577. John Luke - May 28, 2009

Mr. Spock, do you have any of that Red Matter left? We’d like to send SChaos1701 into a black hole and rid the universe of this annoying jerk.

578. Robert Gillis - May 28, 2009

Noticed last night — the reference to “Vader” is very apparent. When the assignments are being given out, “Vader” is assigned to the USS Hood. he’s the last name mentioned before they wish the crew Godspeed.

Young Kirk calls the kid “Johnny” as he drives the Corvette — guess it’s no longer Sam. perhaps Sam doesn’t exist in the time line.

When the top is ripped off the Corvette, some in the audience gasped at the damage to the car!

Enterprise is built at sector 47.

I don’t know why but I like the “bubble wrap” in the Kelvin shuttle — it’s silly but for some reason it works artistically.

Scenes aboard the Kelvin felt VERY real — well done :)

I understand WHY they filmed the engine room set in a brewery (makes the ship look huge) but visually it doesn’t fit with the ship. But to be fair, yet another matte painting of a big room would be boring; maybe next time they can add more CGI to the brewery to make it look more futuristic.

579. SChaos1701 - May 28, 2009

577

So it’s okay for people in the “Vocal Minority” to insult the makers of the film and use base language and not back up what they say. But when someone comes to the defense of this film and gives it right back to these people then all of a sudden I’m a jerk. I mostly respond to these people because I’m convinced they post this stuff purely for attention and I want to call them out. If they didn’t like the movie, then write a review that isn’t full of insults and actually back up their argument. Sorry if that makes me look like a jerk.

But still…nice one.

580. captain_neill - May 29, 2009

Folks I get the opinion here that you must like the new film or else you get penalized.

Is it a must that everyone must like this film? The films that I love have their naysayers but I respect their opinions even though I don’t agree.

I guess the greatest challenge for me was 2 people I know stating they preferred Chis Pine over William Shatner, and these are two people who have seen the original. I felt annoyed at this because the originals are still better. But I respect their opinions.

But thats not all hate each other cause we all don’t think the new Trek movie is the best ever. I liked it but it is NOT the best one.

581. Romy - May 29, 2009

#570 (T Allen)

I’m not a huge fan of the movie – I wouldn’t give it more than 5 or maybe 6 out of 10 – but I have to back up SChaos1701 who is totally correct about Chris Doohan posting on this site.
Chris hasn’t posted in this particular thread (if that’s where you’re looking) but if you check around the rest of the site you will find his posts. In among those posts, he has said a number of times that his dad would have been happy with Simon Pegg’s portrayal of Scotty.

582. SChaos1701 - May 29, 2009

I wouldn’t be so pissy about some of the bad reviews if they didn’t just base language like “Star Drek” and actually back up their argument.

583. Monique - May 29, 2009

I loved this movie. I’ll be the first to put it out there that I’m not an avid TOS fan (I’m more of a Next Generation fan, but I’ve got enough TOS knowledge to know what’s going on the world of Captain Kirk’s Enterprise), and I thought that, even though it looked cool, the movie was not going to be catering to newbies like myself. I was very glad to feel welcomed and embraced by the world of Star Trek without feeling the least bit like a dunce for not knowing some of the TOS continuity. The characters felt like their ’60s counterparts, but they also seemed reenergized and fresh. I think that-and Spock and Uhura’s relationship-made the movie for me. I’ll be buying this movie for sure. If you’d like to read a longer version of this review, go to http://mljblog.wordpress.com/2009/05/09/review-star-trek-boldly-goes-as-the-summers-first-real-blockbuster/

584. John - May 30, 2009

When I first heard about plans for a new Trek movie and started to keep track of its development, I thought… “nah… can’t be good”.

Went to see it yesterday. It completely and utterly surpassed my expectations. It’s great. G-R-E-A-T !!

585. Jefferies Tuber - May 30, 2009

I’m developing a new theory this weekend, having just perused the talkbacks at AINT IT SHITTY NEWS? Seriously, when did the fat granddaddy of geek sites become all hate all the time? Probably when Ep1 came out.

But there’s a correlation between TM and AICN and other sites, that could be graphed as a bell curve:
1. In the early days of development and production, both sites features vast, hysterical skepticism. This is fair and to be expected. After all, we love Star Trek and don’t want to see it molested the way it was in the 90s.
2. As word trickled back that Paramount was re-investing in the picture for a Summer release, merchandising and a global marketing campaign, as well as the actors demonstrating their intelligence and sensitivity, the enthusiasm increased and it became cool to be hopeful. Obama didn’t hurt.
3. The last handful of trailers all indicated greatness, or at minimum, a lot thrills and maybe some tears. [The trailer cut of the Kelvin's battle with Greenwood's voiceover "he saved 800 lives..." achieved greatness].
4. The movie received widespread praise and affection from fans old and new, critics ranging from the tweedy [NYT] to the purveyors of Schadenfraude [Rotten Tomatoes]

5. And now, we’ve arrived at the end of the bell curve, where people who enjoyed the movie have laid off the geek sites and are letting it all soak in. We’re remembering laying on the shag carpet with a bowl of cereal and Star Trek in 1970s syndication. We’re reexamining the first 4 features, seeing things [budget, cast, age, artful dialog, even stupid stuff]. Most of all, we fans of the new film are satisfied and we’re soaking in it.

Therefore, the vast majority of the people on the boards are the haters. The non-fans and James Cawley dead-enders [interesting how they've converged] are blasting this and the AI[S]N boards with nastiness.

I have friends on staff with [a] member[s] of the supreme court. I shared my lone criticism of the new movie. Not only did they agree, but they said that this comment echoes a conversation within the supreme court: if there’s any problem with the new movie, it’s that it’s relentlessly paced and you never get to just ponder a beautiful scene or let a moment sink in. Even the battle scenes are fast and not-at-all like a 19th century naval battle [a quaint, but dated model].

I think the filmmakers achieved heroic status in this movie. If you really consider the many, vast, disparate and creatively impossible tasks that the filmmakers had to accomplish, it’s the film and brand-making equivalent of a Herculean task.

To those who honestly feel that this movie is a 1-6/10, that’s cool. But seriously, for those of us who’ve suffered in silence through the unholy fall of Star Trek, from GENERATIONS to ENTERPRISE, we’ve been ‘waiting for this moment for [almost] our entire lives.’ We now have 2 hours of entertainment as our reward. I won’t call them haters, but let’s say the “low raters.” The low raters have literally several hundred hours of digital entertainment set in the unaltered universe to soak in like a hot bath for the rest of their lives.

Please don’t show up at our birthday party and take a shit in the middle of the room.

ps. Giacchino’s score grew on me through the 2nd and 3rd viewing. But I still want my Alexander Courage music back. That music is as holy and creatively sanctified as any character, ship or canon nugget.

586. Jason - May 30, 2009

I liked the movie overall! It IS good!

I agree with several other comments made but the most important one is “the bridge is too different”. They kept the shape of the enterprise – good! Engineering is too different – should be a mix of TNG type stuff and TOS.

The plot was reasonably good but you need to read the prequel comic which leads you into the plot.

One thing I noticed about one of the last scenes which struck me as odd was that while travelling at warp, to make the ship go even faster (to break away from gravitational pull), they decided to drop the warp core and explode it. Question: If you drop the core, aren’t your warp engines deenergized? The way I look at it, for the few seconds they drop the core, they aren’t at warp so their speed has to drop off dramatically – this makes the storyline a little more unbelievable for me!

I hope the sequel is better written and the interior shots of the enterprise are modernized without taking away from the original TOS design too much.

Score: 6/10

587. Doug L. - May 31, 2009

re 582… I totally agree. If you have an argument about the movie, let’s not base it in nasty comments. A lot of people do.

I tried very hard to review Star Trek as a movie, and nothing else. If you have problems with design, acting, premise, motivation, or character development, then spell it out. I’m annoyed that half the reviews discussed the appropriateness of Chekov’s age, or got hung up on how long it took the Enterprise to get to Vulcan.

I had a lot of problems with the movie as a movie viewer and a very few as a long time Trek Fan. Trying to be a critic of Star Trek without being tied to a disgruntled fandom that can’t handle the details of a relaunch is frustrating.

I was disappointed that this movie wasn’t better grounded. Character arcs were flimsy and poorly developed (not poorly conceived), motivation was non-existant, or otherwise Over sold…

ex. – kirk gets into a fight at a bar, and is challenged to join starfleet… so he does. The film explores his fatherless youth with a car chase.

ex. – Spock and the Federation try to help Nero prevent the destruction of Romulus, so Nero holds a 25 year grudge and opts to wipe out a large chunk of civilization.

ex. – Quinto Spock wouldn’t be sufficiently upset with the destruction of Vulcan to warrant an emotion response… so we also have to witness the truly unnecessary death of his mother as well. (i thought this entire sequence was forced and questionable based on previously established moments with Kirk & Sulu regarding the transporter)

ex. – Uhura. Her entire reason for being seems to be to coincidentally provide Kirk with information to save the federation, allow for a punchline between Kirk & Spock on the Transporter, and serve as hot space chick in a who’s going to sleep with me arc. I feel bad that that’s all she gets. At least they really thought out the Communiations role in Enterprise.

ex. – Starfleet apparently ignores experienced officers in place of people who show up out of nowhere. Whether I can buy this scenario isn’t the point as much as it didn’t need to be presented this way to make the story fun or exciting. It’s pretty week.

ex. – The destruction of Vulcan. Did the movie have to be about saving Earth again? Wouldn’t it have been relevant enough to save Vulcan? My personal preference would have been to witness the destruction of Romulus, and Spock’s failure to save it at the start of the film. This would provide much of the missing motivation, while saving Vulcan would have been the big challenge and end payoff.

The Pacing of the movie never allowed for any of these more significant moments to be felt. Leonard Nimoy unfortunately seemed to be there only to spit out every Trek Cliche he has ever uttered throughout the original crew movie series and give us a flashback backdrop for the where’s and why’s of the plot, which should have been clearer long before that.

Despite all this, I like the cast, I like the premise, I like the reboot, but some serious issues for me, make this ultimately an extremely average movie.

What’s not average is the enormous feat of successuflly relaunching Star Trek. They did enough right to drive interest. The movie despite it’s flaws is FUN, and has a very likable cast, top notch effects, and in general… a good story.

I have yet to see it a second time for a re-evaluation, but i’m truly stymied by the overwhelming praise, and lack of any real criticism this movie engenders.

Doug L.

588. Captain Cohen - May 31, 2009

I took a 200 mile round trip to see this the weekend it came out, on a very big screen in London.

I gave it a 5 out of 5 then.
For the first sound you hear – beep .. beep .. beep .. being a sound that takes us back to the Original Series
For the bridge having the arc-lamps, so similar to the pilot episode[s!]
For the excitement,
For being CHARACTER-centred, but still having a kickass story,
For the voice of Majel Barrett:Roddenberry
For the pre-title sequence alone ..
For the Tribble in the birdcage
For lines that made the whole audience laugh, cheer, clap ..
For “Cupcake”
For the “dedication”
For the multiphase testing of Spock – so like the scenes in ST:IV.
For Kirk munching on a crisp apple when facing the “Kobayashi Maru” – so sharply reminiscent of ST: TWOK in the Genesis Cave and his line to Saavik: “I don’t like to lose”
For the alien in the bar [you're just dying to ask: 'why the long face?']

For carefully referencing the fact that this was an alternative event .. [because of what Nero has done] Spock – both, Kirk, Scotty and Uhura – at various points talk about the idea that what may have already happened in the future might now be changed – might never happen, except for in an alternative universe..
As Uhura says: “If you believe that the future is immutable what we’re doing is only changing the past. The same future, or if you prefer, parallel one, will continue ..”

==============================================

I’ve just seen the movie at IMAX, a mere 30 mile round-trip.
This time I gave it 8 out of 5
For little extras that I missed the first time ..
Spock and Spock Prime’s identical eye colours
Pine’s uniform at the end of the film so reminding me of the Motion Picture uniform.
The exuberance – and frustration that Chekov shows,
The importance of the “lightning storm” description at the start of the movie.

And SO MUCH MORE.

I believe that Trek will indeed live long, and once again it will prosper.

589. Captain Cohen - May 31, 2009

Incidentally I can’t remember the last movie I went to see more than once in its’ original’ screening release period.

thanks Gene for your originality

thank JJ. Thanks Roberto & Alex

And big thanks to the cast and crew

590. I have been, and always will be, a Trekkie - June 1, 2009

@ 239 ClosetTrekker – I love your comments, and consider you a kindred spirit on these bulletin boards.

– I was trying to read everyone’s reviews, but gave up about 300 into it.

Now to think about my own…hmm, maybe I should see it that 5th time to refresh my memory…

591. I have been, and always will be, a Trekkie - June 1, 2009

@377 ClosetTrekker – with one exception, I love TNG, and think you might be bit biased putting ALL their films underneath TOS. – I’m not slamming you, only curious if you would agree that it’s a “possible bias”?

592. W. Joseph Thomas - June 2, 2009

Eh. Let’s advertise myself.

My 8,000 word review (too long for this comment box) can be found at http://www.noriega.biz.

And I got paid to write it! Crazy!

593. John from Cincinnati - June 2, 2009

Star Trek 09 was a very entertaining movie. With that said, I still want to see the origins of the characters from the Prime timeline, not some warped alternate version of things.

594. Jim Ertel - June 3, 2009

The Trek movie I’ve been waiting for all my life !

9.9/10

595. David(Daxsin) - June 4, 2009

This movie was such a joy to see. I’ve seen it three times and I can’t rave about it enough. I’ve been a solid trek fan since for many years now and I would have to say that this one is my favorite.
I go to movies here and there, I’m not one to go out and see a new movie every weekend. With that said, there have been only a handful of movies where at the end there’s a nice applause when the credits roll. As stated earlier, the three times that I viewed this awsome film, the audiences applauded. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a movie where people were that happy with a film. I honestly can’t remember the last movie to tell you the truth.

596. frosby - June 4, 2009

as a film it was entertaining, i think the build up of kirk and spock to adulthood was too rushed, more background was needed.
i can only describe the film as a synthetic hamburger, yes it has awsome special effects and sound but it did not have what the original 1966-9 Star trek had.

The original 1966-9 Star trek had a believable soul, charisma, charm camerarderie and connetion between the actors something that cgi will never attain.

I believe thats why Nimoy is in the film, to sell something to us that we don’t need and already had with the original series.
You just can’t recreate creation.

597. fansince66 - June 4, 2009

I love this movie.It is my favorite Trek movie-to-date.I very much appreciate what JJ,and co. have done for the ST franchise,and for us, the fans.I’ve watched ST since ’66’.I’ve watched all the derivitives that followed.I had become very adept at manipulating all the “pieces” of ST in my imagination,to weave together various stories for my own amusement(perhaps the”nuts & bolts” of fan activity).

And,come on now,truth-be-told,STAR TREK had grown stale and hide-bound,trapped in its’ own canon convolutions.

JJ did exactly what needed to be done.Go back to the original characters(excellently portrayed by these new guys),with an events-changing,’time-travel” excuse to do some things differently,and NOT just simply remake the original 78 episodes of STAR TREK.

One genuinely new addition to the franchise is mr. Greenwood’s character:capt/admiral Pike.He is a true gem to be added to the collection.The iconic trio of Kirk/Spock/McCoy is now a quartet.WELL DONE JJ & co.

PS…please,no khan.Please, don’t turn Kirk, and the BIG “E” loose, on their 1st 5-year mission of exploring JUST YET!!!You need to show us more of the Mentor Pike interacting with Kirk(& Spock&Bones).

Give us Pike, leading a Task Force of ships & soldiers on a “peace-keeping/humanitarian” mission, somewhere in the Federation neighborhood ,to restore the peace& aid the victims of some assault(from Klingons?/Cardassians?/new antagonists?/etc…),with capt Kirk as his leadman in the endeavor.It would be Kirk’s final maturation into “the Leader” we all know him to become.Or something similar.Just get Pike/Kirk/Spock/Bones in there,in the sequel.

PPS…Can we please have Federation troops wear the sky-blue colors of the UN on their fatigues?(helmets/armbands/flakvests perhaps?…please?)The UFP is so obviously the fulfillment of all our hopes&dreams that was once held for the UN(back in the 50’s & 60’s.It is so.I was there, in that era.)

In sum, STAR TREK is very much worth seeing,more than once.

598. Nancygc - June 4, 2009

My chief complaint the first time I saw the movie was that it ended too soon. I wanted MORE. So I am disappointed to hear there will be a movie sequel…what? No TV series? C’mon!
Yes, I have read a lot of movie reviews and I agree with many of the criticisms. Doesn’t matter! I love it! The characters I began loving back in the early 70s are back – it feels right. Now we have to wait two years for more? That doesn’t feel right!
I do admit that I didn’t like the Spock/Uhura thing the first time I saw it. The second time I surprised myself, I got into it. Uhura in general is a much stronger character, it is nice to have a woman to look up to in the original crew, even though she is much younger than I. She rocks!
I don’t know why people are complaining about Scotty’s sidekick. There’s potential in the character, it wasn’t overdone and it added just the right touch of humor. Do you think that was an accident?
I also do not quibble over the engine room. That was obviously “the bowels of the ship,” we never got to see the control area, where the magic is. I hope they don’t make it antiseptic, like Geordi’s was.
I hope I’m not being sadistic, but I loved it when the first red shirt went. I also loved Simon Pegg as Scotty, although I was a bit puzzled at how Scotty became chief engineer so fast.
The whole cadet to captain thing also bothered me. But, watching the film for the third time, I decided that Spock Prime must have had a hand in it. Perhaps he had a long conversation with Capt. Pike? (About destiny?) Add that to the number of ships destroyed at Vulcan, Kirk’s talent and the corresponding lack of personnel and it makes a little sense. Just a little.
Losing Vulcan was painful; I was shocked. But it opens up a lot of story potential and makes it clear that this is a very different reality.
Kirk as a child was unlikeable. Someone in line said that Abrams really wanted to keep the movie to less than two hours, so maybe he left out some storyline that made that child punk Kirk more sympathetic. I wondered who was the guy walking along the side of the road in that scene; now that I’m reading the book version the whole thing makes a lot of sense and is very compelling. Otherwise, Kirk’s just a jerk using “no dad” as a reason to act out.
I’m hoping the dvd has a much longer version. This cut is too fast, you don’t have time to absorb things.
But, all in all, they had a lot they had to do with this movie and they did a terrific job.
Besides bringing back Star Trek, they gave me a great “I told you so” to my son, who insisted a few years ago that Star Trek was deader than a doornail.
He’s 32 and he has made fun of TOS all his life. He loved the movie. He said it’s the first time he understood the whole Kirk/Spock dynamic.
This is what Abrams and his associates have done, they have connected with a younger generation, thereby giving the franchise a future!
I hope that future includes Star Trek as a commentator on social, moral and political issues. I hope no one tries to showhorn Shatner into it. And I really hope it’s a series, allowing for a continuing plot and avoiding the trap of the movies, best described by Rich in #186 says: “an undeveloped, awkward plot featuring another vengeful heel in another big, powerful ship.”
But I thank everyone involved in the picture. It has resurrected the passion I felt within me so long ago.

599. BurntSynapse - June 5, 2009

Doing a by the minute review at: http://is.gd/PeFy

600. Anatoly - June 5, 2009

re 587 -Spock’s romance with Uhuru really felt tacked on to me. There was no history to it; just a couple of scenes of them holding and kissing. It seemed more like a gratuitous moment, as if somebody somewhere reviewed the script and said “wait a minute, where’s the romance subplot?”

it looks like it. Please no romance between Spock and Uhura further. It looks false and changes Spock`s character completely. The main idea was- he learns what is it just friendship and his value in the series that he is cold and logical Vulcan ( when Kirk -vice versa- passionate and strong-willed Human ). And both of them first of all love their work and their dreams about stars. Please do not repeat Next generation.

And Karl Urban was brilliant as McCoy

601. Ian - June 5, 2009

0/10 – Absolutely AWFUL. This was a generic cookie-cutter sci-fi flick with the Star Trek characters (pretty much in name only) pasted over the top.

This movie amounts to a complete rape of the Star Trek franchise and a willful destruction and desecration of everything that has come before.

The characters are caricatures, the sets look like Apple-store rejects, canon has been completely thrown out, and the “alternate timeline” excuse is feeble.

Thankfully, The Great Bird was cremated, otherwise he’d be spinning in his grave so fast he’d have drilled half way to China by now.

602. RadarSadie - June 6, 2009

I’m 52 years old – and I still went to see this film May 7th (the day prior to official release). I absolutely loved the film.

I’ve been a Trekker since September, 1966. I remember the time when TNG came on TV in 1987. I felt a bit of betrayal because the powers-that-be (including Roddenberry) had the audacity to change ANYTHING from TOS. I resisted TNG but watched it anyway. I finally loosened up and realized that the only permanent thing in life is change. I loved TNG and Voyager.

Remember people, this is SiFi fantasy – it’s not real. It is entertainment. Great entertainment, but it’s entertainment. The original actors are gone. For the entertainment to continue, we all need to be flexible. Star Trek is a *business* first and foremost. It is there to make money. The film must appear to younger people who are not yet Trekkers. The addition of Nimoy, imo, was for us dinosaurs!

Old timeline, new timeline, who cares!

Were there things in the movie that I found odd? Of course! Kirk’s rapid rise to Captain for one thing. The Romulan ship looked like some sort of Centipede. As far as the bridge goes, do you think that realistically, a bridge in the 23rd century would look more than the 1966 bridge or the 2009 bridge? I say 2009.

I, for one am happy that the Franchise has begun anew and that there will be Star Trek films more often than every 7 years.

603. crone - June 6, 2009

I am a 58 year old woman who watched the first episode of TOS when it aired and have been a trekkie ever since. Have liked most of the other incarnations but my heart will always belong to TOS. [ I feel this need to state for the record that I am a fairly normal married woman with two adult children who does not live in anyone's basement - nor do I speak Klingon, or own any Trek memorabilia.] I just saw the new movie for the fourth time. I adore it. Thanks to JJ Abrams and crew for reviving my favorite fantasy world. I feared it was dead. It is nice to know that these characters will very likely outlive me. This is our mythology and it is alive and well ! I have been walking around with a silly grin on my face ever since the film opened. Thanks again.

604. John - June 6, 2009

fansince66 – You’ve been a fan since 1966 and you think Pike is a NEW CHARACTER!?!?!?! Pike was the second Captain of the Enterprise (after Robert M. April) and Spock’s first (as far as we know) Commanding Officer… and that was clearly established in the original pilot episode, “The Cage,” as well as the later, 2-part episode, “The Menagerie.”

What a total and complete ABOMINATION this movie is…

Epic fail on Abram’s part… a complete destruction of what has been clearly established by Gene Roddenberry. It’s embarrassing that so-called fans consider this monstrosity to be the second coming.

Star Trek, with a very few notable exceptions, has worked on the linear timeline theory, rather than the multiverse theory; that is, if you go back 20 years, you remain in the same timeline and it affects the present day. Bear that in mind before you start cheering for Abrams’ Abomination; it means that everything Trek that has come before has now been eradicated from time.

None of the characters were true to form, though I must admit that Karl Urban did a good job as McCoy even though, in look, he’d have made a better Gary Mitchell.

I won’t be watching any more of these piles of Star Trek wannabe s**t from Abrams.

605. SChaos1701 - June 7, 2009

604

Unless you can put together a coherent and well written critique of the movie citing specific and well thought up reasons you didn’t like this movie, then I will stick to what I have to say about people who say this tripe about the movie and will count you among them.

606. carnival_of_souls2047 - June 7, 2009

Overall, it was a good movie and i’m glad I saw it.
The good: Casting, special effects, and new direction.
The bad: Story too light, ship design, and too many Star Wars references (ugh).
Rating: 6.7 out of 10.00.
Summary: Believe me when I say this, 6.7 is a good rating from me. I’d like to see a smarter science fiction flavored trek through the stars. I love Star Trek and I always will. Star Trek Eleven will set up and even better Star Trek Twelve when JJ and company make the fine adjustments.

607. SChaos1701 - June 8, 2009

606

I think that Star Trek XII will be as big as The Dark Knight.

608. SChaos1701 - June 8, 2009

I saw the movie for the third time (on IMAX) and it’s keeps getting better better every time I see it despite what