Search
Mobile Site Shops eMail Author Caption Comp Monthly Poll Sudden Death Colour Key Statistics Cookie Usage
Ships Fleets Weaponry Species People Timelines Calculators Photo Galleries
Stations Design Lineage Size Charts Battles Science / Tech Temporal Styling Maps / Politics
Articles Reviews Lists Recreation Search Site Guide What's New Forum
ReviewImagesDatapointsQuotes
TimelinePreviousNextYour View

Star Trek

Guest Reviews

Title : Star Trek Rating : 5
First Aired : 8 May 2009 Stardate : 2258
Director : J.J. Abrams Year : 2258
Writers : Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci Season : 11
Rating : 3.0652 for 46 reviewsAdd your own review
Reviewer : Magus Rating : 3
Review : I went into this movie with the understanding that this was going to be a completely new thing and the intent to enjoy it on its own merits and not judge it based on the films with which it happens to share the same name. The problem is, on its own merits, I think it's a mediocre action film. The films is certainly big, with lots of spectacle, but at 30 noise and spectacle just don't impress me like they did at 15. The plot is contrived, with little depth, and shaky handheld camerwork used in place of any attempt to build real tension. Worst of all, I didn't really like new Kirk. I'm sure it's just a choice, and perhaps the character will mature in the future, but the Kirk we see is a pompous jerk who has everything handed to him without, as far as we see, really earning it. We as viewers are supposed to accept that Kirk should command the ship, because the other Kirk did, but without that knowledge I see no reason why this Kirk should not have been locked in the bridge for the length of the film. That said, I really like the new crew. Anton Yelchin and Simon Pegg were particular standouts for me, and I thought that Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, and, of course, Leonard Nimoy were terrific in giving this film what little emotional core it was allowed to have. I see this as a poor episode with a good crew, and I look forward to a sequel with the hope that, free from the origin story requirements of this film, something better can be achived in the future.
Reviewer : Dean Martlou Rating : 3
Review : A bit heavy-handed in referencing the various original series running gags, and tried to pack too much story into too little time, so that old-Spock had to explain to young-Kirk what had happened beforehand in a separate sequence, a rare jarring moment that made me stop and think about the pacing of the movie. Although a few portions of the movie fell a little flat, it generally lived up to the promise of the ads. A die-hard Trek fan will find it to be either a fantastic new image of the franchise or else a giant waste of time. Personally, I lean towards the former. Some bold moves were taken in the plot, and although I had sever doubts about the time-travel aspects of it, they sealed together extraordinarily well, given later Trek's history of abusing the subject. Rank-shuffling was the call word of the day, as each of the main protagonists changed rank at least once in the movie even during the contiguous portions of it. A good chunk of the plot showed us the main characters in the process of growing up, and of entering the Starfleet Academy, but even those portions that took place on the Enterprise, within the short period of the most intense action, were rife with field promotions and rank shuffling, as though either the writers or the characters weren't quite sure about where everyone should be. This was explained a little bit later on, but not entirely to my satisfaction, and it seemed that the plot could as easily have been served by having everyone at the ranks they should be. The visual design of the movie, while striking, was at times more on display than the characters--granted, this a a classic trait of good Trek, but still, it was noticeable at times in a very The-Motion-Picture sort of a way, which isn't necessarily a good comparison to inspire when it comes to visuals. Certainly the set designs were evocative of the first Trek movie, with their clean lines and uses of the color white nearly to the exclusion of all else on any kind of a "good guy" vessel--except for the Kelvin at the beginning, but we didn't really see her at her best moment, either. The Enterprise itself, as in any proper Trek movie, was a character apart. Her performance was admirable here. From the fine movements of the original in the first movie, to the clean power of the A, each Enterprise that shows up on screen has a distinct personality. This one was a lady. Although she seemed dainty and looked almost delicate at times, she proved that she wasn't afraid to get her hands a little dirty. I didn't like the design of the ship from the first time I saw her in the prerelease pictures that were published to give fans an early look at her, and indeed, her first appearance onscreen, as an incomplete vessel in a planetbound drydock did nothing to assuage my fears. She looked bloated and ugly. The first sight of her as a complete, well-formed ship, however, was striking and beautiful. Even in spacedock, she looked like she was trying to move, and when she left her moorings to stretch her legs, you couldn't help but be impressed. It was immediately apparent that this was the newest, and the best, ship in the fleet. Spock, as played by Leonard Nimoy, captured clearly the wisdom and oddly human soul of the character that has become iconic to western pop culture, at once alien and deeply familiar. Nimoy hasn't lost the character, but Spock has clearly evolved over the years. Rounding out the once-stiff Vulcan with a sense of humor and a soft intensity, Nimoy injected real emotion into the character, a task that has never been easy to do given the subtlety demanded by the role. As played by Zachary Quinto, Spock is almost more intriguing. We glimpse in the actor's performance the conflict between the human and the Vulcan that is only hinted at in most of Trek, and really explored only in the novels. His believability is increased by the turmoil that Spock experiences, and although at moments the actor himself shone through, he was onscreen the character at almost all times, an excellent successor to Nimoy's role, and certain to add depth to the character. I found myself preferring his portrayal to Nimoy's for the tumultuous younger years of Mister Spock. Kirk, on the other hand, missed in many ways the nuances that make James T. Kirk James T. Kirk. Granted, it's a large and difficult role, but the actor (whose name, like many others from the film, escapes me) simply could not make the leap fully. He captured in broad strokes the impressionistic basics, but most of the moments that were clssically Kirk were driven not by his acting but rather by the script. Kirk, like Spock's impromptu expositionary narrative, was a low point in the film, and the actor will have to work hard to match the role as Shatner played it--two parts space cowboy, one part corrupted boy scout, one part barroom brawler. McCoy was the unsung highlight of the show. The actor captured him perfectly. Deforest Kelly seemed to live again on t
Reviewer : UnknownCaptioneer Rating : 5
Review : HERE BE SPOILERS. An amazingly well-done movie that is able to overcome it's shortfalls and plot-holes to reach the same level of Trek greatness as TWOK and FC, "Star Trek" both honors the past continuities and allows for a (almost) anything goes type of future. But enough with the (justified) hyperbole. The best thing this movie has going for it (apart from it's excellent production qualities such as Special Effects) is the cast. Pine is able to bring a Shatner swagger combined with some "Han Solo" rebellion without looking like a parody of either. Quinto dissolves into a young Spock, one who clearly is one who follows logic, but also has that bit of humanity in him. And then there is Karl Urban, who is so much like the late, great D. Kelley that he steals every scene he is in. Zoe Saldana, although not quite Nichelle Nichols in appearance or action, is certainly easy on the eyes and does well with the rather-unexpected romance arc Uhura has in the film. Other members of the crew do well (to varying degrees) but don't get enough screen time to really make a judgment. Of course, the supporting cast is also superb, led by Leonard Nimoy, who is still Spock after all these years. Eric Bana is able to chew scenery with the best of them, although Nero's motives are under-developed if you haven't read the prequel comic series. Bruce Greenwood is great as Pike, really giving you the feeling that he is a pragmatic man who could face down the Talosians and kick ass across the galaxy, but also be a fatherly figure to a crew. The story is good enough, using the "Alternate Timeline" approach to it's fullest in order to keep everyone guessing, killing off a character alive in the universe we've been familiar with and destroying one of the most important planets in trek lore. It's full of crazy coincidences (like the fact that there is a planet near Vulcan that JUST HAPPENS to have the same name as Delta Vega) and such, but it works well enough that you don't care after awhile, since it's such a fun ride. Even better, the writers put in a bunch of easter eggs to Trek fans, such as the Kobayashi Maru, "Admiral Archer" and his love of Beagles, and basically every other sentence that comes out of Nimoy's mouth. And the Courage theme music, which is wisely held back until the end. Overall, I'd rate it the third best Trek movie, behind only "First Contact", and, of course, The Wrath of Khan.
Reviewer : katefan Rating : 5
Review : I loved this movie. I loved the actions, I enjoyed the visuals, and I laughed in all the right places. The cast was amazing and I am very much looking forward to the next movie (fingers crossed). Does the movie have flaws? Of course it does. But the pluses so outweigh the minuses that I am more than happy to dismiss them.
Reviewer : James Koon Rating : 4
Review : Please be aware that there are major spoilers in this review. Honestly, when I left the theater when I saw Star Trek the first time, I didn't know how to feel. Because of this, I decided to split my review into different sections, since there are so many facets to this movie that came together beautifully, while some parts of this movie were lackluster, at least to this avid Star Trek Fan. Plot Review: My main issue with the plot of this movie was not the inconsistencies with timeline, or even with the issues with established technologies. I understand that this movie was meant to be a reset, a last-ditch effort to keep the Star Trek series alive. And that it did... The largest issue I found with the movie was in the villain, Nero. I did read the Countdown comics, and I still didn't understand how he could blame things so fully on one man, to the point he would commit mass-genocide against the Vulcans as well as attempt to take out Earth and the rest of the Federation. It seemed to me that their whole purpose on bringing Nero in was to erase the franchise and start from scratch. And oh, the repercussions this has on future timelines. No more Vulcan, Kirk is now captain in 2258 (He originally promoted in 2263, which means Pike's 5 year mission is completely gone). In addition, it is likely that Tuvok would have never been born (2264), Spock will never go to Vulcan for the Kollinar (sp), and who even knows how the V'ger incident, or Khan, or any of the rest could even unfold. Not even thinking about how things will play out into the 2360s and on. Needless to say, the plot was golden around the main character development, especially Kirk and Spock. You must remember that these actors are portraying the characters 7 or more years before we originally saw them, and Kirk’s life up to that point had been radically altered by Nero’s appearance and the destruction of the Kelvin. Seeing as these aspects were a major point of this entire movie, the fact they pulled it off well saves the Emo-Nero issues I have. Casting Review: May I say, Wow! Chris Pine as Kirk felt natural without the need for imitation, Zachary Quinto as Spock was perfect, and Karl Urban as Bones was absolutely fantastic. All of the actors and actresses did a fantastic job at making the roles their own without mocking their predecessors. And of course, Leonard Nemoy. He portrayed the aged Spock perfectly, maintaining his ‘emotional’ sterility but adding a hint of warmth to the role. Exactly how you could imagine a man who is wise beyond years, with the weight of his life on this shoulders. Casting could definitely be the greatest aspect of this movie. Music Review: I would have to say I didn’t really notice the music on the first viewing, as it blended quite well with the actual scenes to the point that it was one with the scene. I went back on subsequent viewings and it started to pop out more, and I would say it definitely fit the movie well. Trekkie Review: As I said before… if something hadn’t been done, we wouldn’t have anymore Star Trek. But that does not stop the inner trekkie in me from saying “What the bloody hell are you doing!?” Destroying Vulcan before Kirk’s first five-year mission is such a major event that my mind starts thinking for hours non-stop about the reprocussions to the beloved Star Trek universe. Somewhere in my mind I almost felt it disrespectful to all that came after the original Star Trek, or even the original Star Trek. But it was pulled off well, and I do believe that it will lead to some good movies. But, a little piece of me died when I saw this movie… akin to when I saw the end of Undiscovered Country, when I knew that the old was out and they had moved onto the new. Redesign Review: Oh, my poor engineering. How I will miss thee. Most of the Enterprise I really liked, moreso when I saw it in action instead of the still pics. The bridge was beautiful, the corridors were nice… but… engineering… what happened? To a point, I understand the idea behind the ‘steam-punk’ engineering design. It’s the bowels of the ship, there’s a lot of pipes and conduits and such, and it was probably easier to use an on-location place in filming as opposed to building a whole new engineering, especially with the scope they tried to show the ship in. But c’mon! Put a single core in there. Hell, digitally paint one in! I will say, for the first time, when I saw the Enterprise, I felt the size of it. Even on the spacewalk during First Contact, there really wasn’t that scope. Though, the way I understand it, ILM said that the digital ship was about 900 meters long… Not going to get into the logistics and reprocussions of this revelation, however, if it is true, the movie went beyond a controlled reset and just rewrote the manual. Literally. Overall Review: Yes, certain aspects of this movie were great, and overall I found the movie immensely enjoyable. But as I said before, a little piece of me died, just as it did when I first saw Undisc
Reviewer : krush2383 Rating : 3
Review : The next installment will tell the tale. And there will be one, count on it. The main purpose, I think, of this movie, besides being a very good action show, was to "cut the cord" with the past. With the alternate timeline now the actual time line, future writers are not tied to TOS, or anything else that came before. Very clever.
Reviewer : drow Rating : 5
Review : Everything which needed to be right was right, and awesome.
Reviewer : Dante Rating : 5
Review : To start off I will say that I found the movie to be fantastic. It contained all the essentials for a Star Trek movie; action, drama, comedy, and geek-talk to the extreme. I've heard several hardcore fans protest the obvious discontinuities and changes made to the STU timeline, but I was surprised at how many nods there were to the previous movies and series. Take the battle of the drill, not only does the token red shirt die but it was in a very pointless way; pull the stupid cord, man! There were tons of quotes used from the previous movies; there was the father/son tension between Spock and Sarek and I was stunned at Karl Urban's ability to play McCoy. I was pleased to see a more diverse alien cast (no Andorians though, arg) and the overall design of the Enterprise's interior was very imaginative. She was beautiful, but not all polished and clean like those that came after her. McCoy had it right when he said that space was dangerous and Enterprise's design reflected that. Her bridge and upper decks were streamlined but as you go into her guts, she's all robust and twisted; complete with shuttles with scratched paint. Well now, on to the bad. My problems with the film aren't exactly problems. Like all good movies, it could have been longer. There was so much going on in ST that it gave me a kind of rushed filling; as if they were trying to sprint to the end. There were so many new things in the film that it has me wishing that they'd immediately start a new series that takes off after the film ended. Personally it's the subtle details, the things you see in the background, are what draw me to Star Trek. Look at that massive station above Earth, those seven other Starfleet vessels; I'm thinking it's time to bring back the Star Trek Encyclopedia specifically for this movie. The only other change I would make is to Nero and his crew. Yes it was explained why they were there and the reason behind his attack but I felt that especially Nero needed to have a much stronger personality. If he was supposed to be bloodthirsty then make him bloodthirsty, insane then make him really insane. He was intense but I think he needed a finer edge; like he was a breath away from losing it. As for the discontinuity errors, I'll learn to live with them.
Reviewer : SomosFuga Rating : 5
Review : I realy like this movie and i agree with most of the comments here. One thing i didn´t like (and nobody has mentioned) is the number of vulcan survivors. Ok, 6 billions is a good number for Vulcan or any other planet but only 10 000 survivors (all of them off world at the time of the attack?) all around the galaxy for a species that had been warp capable for at least several hundred years seems like a very small number, i mean, come on 10 thousand!!!??? Just on Earth should be several thousands vulcans and what about vulcans on other federation (or not federation) planets, colonies, stations, ships, etcetera; without mentioning pre-federation vulcan colonies where most population could be vulcan. On Enterprise ep "Twilight" Earth is destroyed and 12 years later there are 6 000 surviving humans, that on a time where humanity was warp capable for just 90 years (2063-2153) Would have been better a number around, at least, a few millions and we still have an endangered species. P.S. If i am wrong and 10 000 is the number of survivors evacuated the planet that day, well, NEVERMIND.
Reviewer : jgkight Rating : 3
Review : A grand movie for a grand franchise. I knew going in that there was time travel involved, but I half expected the usual reset button ending or something tied to the Mirror Unverse. Kinda glad it didn't have that. It paid it's respects to the original series, but allows for this new crew to have there own adventures without having any future writers and directors having to constantly look over their shoulders to see if their keeping canon. It also allows the actors to make the roles their own, thus allowing them to stray from the original actors. The running gags from the original series seemed a little forced at times, but they were needed because you got a glimpse that even though the timeline is changed, this is the crew of the Enterprise. Old Spock was dinified as ever. I think it was good that he remembered the Kirk that was his friend, and laid the groundwork so that his younger self would serve next to Kirk. Nero made a decent villian, though I wished that he was a bit more evil, not just some guy out for revenged. This film should go down as one of the better Trek outings. Hopefully, if there is a sequel, it is as good as this on.
Reviewer : lexxonnet Rating : 4
Review : I walked into this movie expecting something truly amazing. I guess I have myself to blame for that. What I saw instead was a summer blockbuster that was exceptionally well done. It was good, but fell short of greatness. I guess being a real fan of TNG and DS9 and movies like TWOK and TUC, I was expecting some sort of a moral, or a corollary in the story. Something beyond just the facts presented. Something that would make me sit up and take notice and say, YES! that was a fantastic part of Star Trek. Instead, I saw a lot of familiar characters, lots of fun one-liners and some exceptional acting (Karl Urban and Simon Pegg were fantastic). The effects were too much of a blur for me to really appreciate them. While I really appreciate the effects in TUC, FC and Nemesis... even TWOK had spectacular effects for its time. The new movie had me feeling a bit dizzy with the pacing of the ships. While the initial movies had us expecting submarines, in this movie, each starship behaved like a TIE fighter! I still must say, the destruction of Vulcan was a heart-breaking moment, even more so at the end of the movie, when I realised there wasn't going to be a reset switch. In a way, that's what this movie does best. It creates a new exciting universe with unexplored possibilities. In many ways, this is the Undiscovered Country, and I hope to discover more of it in the following sequels.
Reviewer : Lucky Strike Rating : 2
Review : Part 1 of 2: I hope you can all indulge me; it may not seem concise but it is to the point and I have much to say. Spoilers below. If someone asked me for a one-liner to describe this new movie, it would go as follows: Great for the casual fan or the newcomer to the franchise, but insulting to those who have devoted so much time to Star Trek these past years. I, unfortunately fall into the latter category. Before I saw this movie, I was well aware that it was a reboot of the franchise and I understood and accepted the purpose behind such a move. It was to revitalize the franchise and bring in new fans and for the most part, I think it will do that. So in that sense, it is mission accomplished. However, Star Trek XI spends too much time catering to the new fans at the expense of those who have invested themselves into the prior five series and ten movies. Prior to seeing the movie, I suspected and indeed feared that I wouldn’t be able to mentally get past the reboot; that I would constantly be comparing these alternate events to the “real” ones and that it would therefore ruin this new movie. Addressing now the “reboot event” of Nero going back in time following the destruction of Romulus, I must commend the creators for actually giving some back story that explains this alternate timeline, rather than simply starting from scratch without any mention of the “normal” timeline that we were accustomed to. This move, I presume it was appease people such as myself so as to not invalidate everything we have seen and known previously in the franchise. However, as was described by this site’s official review, the supernova which threatens the galaxy isn’t all that convincing. Indeed it is a plausible plot device to destroy Romulus and send Nero into a flying rage (as opposed to technobabble that could have been used), but not entirely realistic. And yes, I am aware of the irony of using the term “real” in a science-fiction movie. This brings me to the villain, Nero. I do believe seeing your home world destroyed is sufficient cause for him to seek a horrifying revenge but beyond that, his character seems terribly one-dimensional and underdeveloped primarily because we don’t see enough of him. The focus of the movie is and should be on the crew; however this comes at Nero’s expense. Surely, a few additional minutes could have been spent on the villain to give him some depth? I now turn to my biggest gripe of the movie, the inconsistencies in plot and technology (and stay with me, this isn’t simply geeky criticism though it may sound like it). And a lot of it is caused because the movie’s creators decided to ignore the events and parameters set by the last Star Trek series, Enterprise. I can hear the groans already: “Surely, he’s not using Star Trek: Enterprise as a model of in-universe consistency?” While it too did have its problems, it comes before (2150s) the point of divergence (i.e. Nero travelling back in time to 2233). This means that up until Nero’s time travel, the Star Trek universe should be “as we know it” up until that point. I won’t list them all because then I’ll sound like a petulant child, but the one that struck me the most were the pulse phasers of the U.S.S. Kelvin when beams were previously established as the norm. Yes, it’s an alternate universe, but Nero’s appearance into the past wouldn’t have this immediate impact. These sorts of differences cannot really be accounted for by Nero’s actions, particularly when for 25 years, he was concealed from everyone (i.e. how is it that Nero hiding somewhere means that a water theme park in engineering on the Enterprise becomes a good idea?). Furthermore, I really disliked how Uhura seemed to be…very “loose” with her body and the whole idea of her coming on to a senior officer seems like an insult to Nichelle Nichols, Uhura’s original portrayer. And Uhura is seducing Spock of all people, who reciprocates! Yes, he’s seen his world destroyed and perhaps that truly is good justification for the emotion he shows (and he is half human), but it just “feels” wrong no matter what timeline you’re in. Continued in Part 2 below.
Reviewer : Lucky Strike Rating : 2
Review : Part 2 of 2: Forgive the lack of paragraphs, the system seems to have eliminated them. At this point in my review, I’ll frankly admit that it sounds like I’m nitpicking at nothing. And as I write this, my arguments seem increasingly ridiculous. Why should you take me seriously then? Well, the point I’m trying to get across is that the “reboot” didn’t occur at the very beginning, before Archer and the NX-01. Obviously, the movie’s creators needed to start at the most iconic part of the franchise for a re-launch, but the continued existence of the events depicted in Star Trek: Enterprise (which would remain unchanged in this alternate timeline) means they should have an influence on what we see in Star Trek XI. Unfortunately, they do not and thus, the reboot is incomplete. Why is this such a big deal? Star Trek has always prided itself on being very consistent with itself, despite the huge amounts of storytelling that has been done. It hasn’t always succeeded but for the most part, the viewer is able to suspend disbelief and enjoy the story. One could argue that this movie is simply another one of these cases, and such a person would have a solid position, but I suppose it’s just I was so excited for a revitalization of the franchise that I felt let down when it wasn’t done perfectly. Other low-lights from the movie would have to be: future Spock’s monologue which seems extremely forced and the invention of red matter which looks and sounds cheesy and contrived (even in fiction, Star Trek typically makes a point of explaining how things work to give it a realistic feel). Finally, and this is only supported by my feelings, the movie didn’t have the majestic feel of the series and other movies. I can’t explain it, but it seems that Star Trek XI is just another movie among countless others rather than being a god-among-men kind of impression. I don’t know if I’m able to convey that effectively but it’s left a bitter taste in my mouth and the movie feels cheaper than its predecessors. When I began this review, I vowed to myself to end with something positive and indeed, there is plenty to choose from. The one-liners such as “I’m a doctor, not a…”, “I’m giving it all she’s got, captain!” and “Are you out of your Vulcan mind?” made me smile and even laugh out loud. The nods to the prior stories like Archer’s beagle, the token death of a red shirted officer, Checkhov’s nuclear wessels gag, and the Kobayashi Maru test were outstanding. I loved this sort of thing even though sometimes it felt like they were being thrown in there to paper over the above inconsistencies. The actors cast to portray the crew of the Enterprise were outstanding. Kirk was Kirk without being a carbon copy of what Shatner did, Spock was brilliantly played (his interactions with Uhura aside), Simon Pegg was a genius with Scotty and so on. And without a shadow of a doubt, the best portrayal was Urban in the role of McCoy; DeForest Kelley would have been so proud! And finally, the two Federation ships we get to see up close, the Kelvin and the Enterprise were so beautiful. The Kelvin, though smaller, looked so appropriate for the time and it’s great to see classic designs get re-imagined. And what’s even better is that because of its smaller size, when we do get to see the Enterprise, you really get the feeling that this is the flagship, the newest and best there is and it really is a magical moment. On that note, I’ll end this review because what better way is there to do it, than with a compliment to the ship that started it all, the venerable 1701. Thanks for reading through this long review, I hope it was informative.
Reviewer : Guybrush Rating : 2
Review : Star Trek XI is just an action movie. Gene Roddenberry created Star Trek to be about ideas and issues, the action was just its vehicle. But disregarding typical Trek form, I didn't even find Star Trek to be the good action film I thought I would get. The movie was full of cliches and plot holes including (yet another) shallow villain and silly, trendy set designs that resemble an Apple store (the bridge) and a brewery (engineering) more than a realistic space vehicle. Perhaps the most difficult cliche to stomach was Scotty getting trapped in a system of unnecessarily long windy tubes with blades in them (gotta cut up your liquids, after all). Galaxy Quest made fun of this exact cliche some 10 years ago, but it must have fallen on deaf ears. I also didn't care for the new presence of product placements. No Nokia, your ring tone is still annoying in the 23rd century. To the movie's credit the cast is great, especially Karl Urban recapturing Deforest Kelly's Dr. McCoy as I thought no one could. The humor was also well placed, but Star Trek can be and has been so much more. I never thought I'd miss Brannon Braga...Gene Roddenberry is truly dead. Additionally, as a fan I resented the "erasure" of all Trek history (save Enterprise) made before this point. Far outreaching the bounds of the "alternate time line" I expected, this erasure felt like a defiant insult directed at preceding Trek installments and at me for having liked them. They could fix all of these issues in the next film, but I find myself doubting that any of them will be addressed. Prove me wrong JJ Abrams, please.
Reviewer : drakkillus darksunn Rating : 5
Review : This was a great re-imagination of a timeless franchise! Let us not forget the naysayers when Jean-Luc and crew first saw what their Galaxy-Class starship could do. It was a good action movie, a good sci-fi movie, and a decent storied movie, technobabble mishaps notwithstanding. With excellent portrayals of old friends in a fresh environment, I had high hopes for this film, and was not in the least disappointed. We can be sure of the great wagon-train-voyages future for some time to come, I think!
Reviewer : MetalHead Rating : 4
Review : The ONLY thing that lets this film down is the modern cinematic convention (of which Abrams is notorious for) of shaky cameras and super fast editing during fight sequences, it absolutely ruins the action and makes it hard to follow instead of entertaining. Old school action was perfect, you felt every punch, every blow, felt every bone snap. Star Trek is still an EPIC film and I'm looking forward to more!
Reviewer : b caldwell Rating : 2
Review : action was great but why did they have to unend the entire time line of all the past tv shows and movies. by destroying vulcan you change everything in the shows and books. this makes them all worthless since the movies are bigger than than tv and books. it is also crazy to have a cadet, no matter how talented, take over as captain. this is also not kirks timeline previously. I liked the differences of the characters along with the action but this timeline difference is to much.
Reviewer : BJH Rating : 1
Review : The following is what I wrote on Sistertrek.net: Finally saw the new movie tonight. Words cannot adequately convey the feelings I had when the film finished. However, I can confidently say that not a single thing that went through me was a positive. The overrall feeling was one of forboding, negatvitiy and disappointment. As many of you know, I was very vocal about my cynicism towards this film. Was that justified. In my opinion, yes it was. For those of you who are unfamiliar with my review style, I break the following down into their own paragraphs and then rate each out of 100 and give an overrall mark. This time there will be two: One as a fan, and one as an 'average joe'. But only the fan review will be expanded upon. The 'average joe' will just get scores. Plot Casting/Execution Sets VFX Soundtrack Themes Plot: Star Trek XI, as we all know, is a reboot of a 43 year old franchise. Star Trek needed a boost in popularity, a breath of fresh air, but a prequel was not good idea. Especially a prequel that would essentially make the last 43 years meaningless. The plot for this film is contrived in the extreme. The idea that a singularity can threaten the galaxy is border-line ridiculous, and the idea that little red blobs of stuff can create a blackhole to suck it up is ridiculous. Add to that, the fact that the two ships that go through it survive the trip makes the whole film irrelevent, since Plot Point A is improbable, Plot Point B is improbable and Plot Point C is impossible (since a singularity proceeds faster than light, the blackhole would have to be extremely massive to 'suck it up', not to mention fast. Also, for a blackhole to be that effective, it would destroy the galaxy they are trying to save. Kind of makes it redundant). Also, does anyone find it odd that the Romulan sun is the one that goes nova? A supernova takes years and years to develop and come to a head, and Romulus/Remus would be rendered uninhabitable long before the explosion (try centuries). Yet in Nemesis, (set in 2379), Romulus is perfectly habitable and the sun is normal. Now, assuming that a foreign agent was involved (trilithium, for instance), the Vulcan's would not have sufficient time to build a starship (on Vulcan) and get it to Romulus before the nova (see how long it took Amargosa in Generations). I also like it how the 'Red Matter' is just thrown in there, no explanation of what it does, how it works, and how it can create a blackhole without a sun. Trek has constantly been ridiculed for too much technobabble, but at least most of the time some background is given on the latest gizmo that will save (or ruin) the day... not so here. But let's assume for a moment that all of the above is possible (when it isn't), we go back in time to the year 2233 to the vessel USS Kelvin (same dimensions as the Enterprise, but twice the crew??? Remember, the Kelvin existed in the 'real' Trek universe). Already question marks are raised when a lightning storm develops and then turns into a blackhole. Out comes a massive Romulan vessel with weaponry light-years ahead of the Scimitar (which preceeded it by less than a decade)... speaking of which, that mining vessel certainly was well armed. I also like it how they shoot first and ask questions later (note: sarcasm will be prevelent). I also like how they have completely reinvented the stardate system in the real timeline: stardate 2233 means its the year 2233. It makes sense, and I would like it if the previous system hadn't been used for, oh, 43 years.... Anyhoo, they proceed to blow the Kelvin up- for the fun of it, apparently- along with George Kirk, who amazingly is in Starfleet when previous Trek had shown that Kirk was the only one of his family to serve in the fleet. At least Kirk Snr gets a heroic sendoff. (And how is it that a ship as massive as the Kelvin doesn't destroy Nero when his ship gets rammed, but Spock's puny shuttle thing can at the end of the film ) Anyway, 33 years later, we get some pretty decent character moments with Kirk and Spock in their childhood. Then we meet Uhura, Captain Pike (who I liked) and various assorted characters and move on to the Academy... ... sidetrack. Enterprise. Aside from the extreme hideousness of it, why is it being built planetside? Most starships are not designed for atmospheric flight, and the Enterprise is at least 800 meters long and grosses several hundred thousand tonnes (yes, to have a hangar that big, it would have to be bigger than 400, even though other shots show it to be a more reasonable 400). To move a rig that big would require tremendous power just getting it into orbit, not to mention the materials to withstand the pressure of an atmosphere would make it twice as heavy, which would require more power.... etc etc Back on topic: So eventually we get to Vulcan, where a Federation fleet comprising mostly of cadets and new ships (because apparently the bulk of the fleet was staging elsewhere for an ungi
Reviewer : Toadnuke Rating : 3
Review : This seemed like a good idea back in the day...
Reviewer : Ilari Rating : 3
Review : Over all the movie was not bad at all, and the reset was quite an interesting premise, but it leaves me feeling like I had just watched a rather expensive piece of fan-fiction. And not only that, but a type of fan-fiction of which I am not overly fond of, where one writes over cannon rather than on top of it. I kept feeling like the foundations of the movie were something I could have written better, and I do not consider myself at all one of the best writers. Better than many, perhaps, but not even in the top 1000 of today. And the super-nova destroying Romulus? Good lord, that just makes my brain hurt. Easily one of the worst pieces of bad science Trek has ever given us, and it has been guilty of some rather egregious ones. This aside, much of the writing was very impressive. I really enjoyed the opening scene with the Kelvin, and the death of Spock's mother, and the aftermath... truly heart-wrenching. The acting was on the whole, quite superb. Karl Urban is absolutely amazing as McCoy. I don't think there's a man alive who could have done better. Zachary Quinto's portrayal of Spock, and his inner conflict, was spot on. Although I do see us getting a more emotional Spock than we once had, this has much more to do with the writing than the actor's portrayal. I was, however, a bit let down by the new Kirk. Especially while in the academy, he's just too much of a smarmy prick. I can see Chris Pine giving us a fine Kirk in the future, but he's going to need some time to grow in to the role. As for the others, John Cho gave us and excellent Sulu, and I could really see the swashbuckler we get in The Naked Time in there. I don't know much about Anton Yelchin, but he must be a character impersonator. If he had been in a voice-over I would have been hard pressed to tell that he wasn't the original Checkov, and from what little we saw of him as the character, I think he will do quite well. A thing I can also say for Simon Pegg. His accent bugged me at times, but his acting more than made up for it. Last, but certainly not least, Zoe Saldana was an absolutely wonderful Uhura. I was a bit surprised when the writers had her fall for Spock, but the actress did a stunning job at portraying the warmth and feeling that Uhura has always had. Moving on, special effects are something I've developed a rather love-hate relationship for, as I have felt that movies in recent years, especially science fiction, has have pushed far more than any actual substance. My misgivings about the foundations aside, this is something Star Trek has acquitted it's self of nicely. The special effects are truly top of the line, but the substance of the movie has not been overlooked in favor of them. The battles between Nero's ship and the Kelvin, and then the Enterprise were quite spectacular. I also loved all the move around shots where we fly through the ship to the next scene. As for the plot of the movie it's self, as I have said, I have certain misgivings about the basic premise. Basically erasing all we know of Trek, save Enterprise, and even then, some of that, is, in my opinion, not a good way to go. I hate it when fan-fiction writers disregard cannon. It's my feeling that if you're going to do that, you should just write something original instead. I am, however, a little more forgiving when it is done deliberately to depict an alternate chain of events, as long as it's done well, and isn't just a gimmick to get weird parings off or make to make someone act in a completely uncharacteristic way. When the series it's self does something like this... I just don't know how too feel. With Star Trek, the dialogue was well written, and the action well directed, but the plot was a bit contrived, and the villain was terrible. Hating Spock for failing to save his homeworld in time, I could believe. Deciding to destroy every planet in the federation in return was absolutely ridiculous, and made him feel almost like a villain from a 60's cartoon. Hopefully they will do better in the future films.
Reviewer : dave Rating : 0
Review : Nero? C'mon.. worst villain ever. ..and these Romulans are really stupid looking. I could stand a retooling and a fresh start, but man did they ever blow it. Paramount has developed a spiteful relationship with true Star Trek fans. Anyone who claims that this movie is a credit to the franchise doesn't respect Star Trek for what it is. It didn't need to be turned in to a boring, cardboard-cutout, sexy, hipster, action, bullshit. Star Trek may be notoriously corny, but the dialogue and general tone (attitude?) of this movie is just all wrong. It's bad karma to do stuff like this. Seriously? The dude that made Lost? Why not just rehire the director from Nemesis if you wanted to make some pretentious crap. What it boils down to? If you can't make something cool that's respectful of these old franchise fiction (this goes for all these new movies based on Comics, too) .. why not I dunno .. try making something original?
Reviewer : Captain Picard's Hair Rating : 5
Review : I loved every minute of it! Sure, one can spend all day counting some (legitimate) nits, but frankly I don't care; I forgive every one of them. The f/x were simply mind-blowing, but did not distract one from the true story, the crew. It was this crew that was pulled off unbelievably: the casting could not have been more perfect. Pike and Quinto captured the essense of Kirk and Spock, and I think Karl Urban must secretly be DeForest Kelley resurrected. Quite simply, this film is just so fun, engaging, and touching that you'd have to be neurotic not to have been thrilled regardless of how many nits you can count. The writers' numerous nods to past Trek lore were a nice treat, and happily the technobabble was minimal. 'Star Trek' is fast paced, shows that Trek can be wall-to-wall action, but at the same time touching with a profound but simple theme unhindered by the ponderous moral weight of past 'Trek. I've seen it once in theater, and I'd happily see it a dozen times more. Further, this truly is a film that anyone can enjoy. If the box office earnings aren't proof enough, the smiles and positive comments I heard as the audience left cement it. The friend I took along to the film is a trek novice, but enjoyed it just as much as I. Abrams has pulled off the miraculous task of creating a Trek film that can be enjoyed by laity and hardcore Trek geeks alike. 5 stars out of five.
Reviewer : Rizulli Rating : 4
Review : I loved this movie. The characters were great, the storyline pretty good and at no point throughout the movie did I go: "the TOS characters never would have done/said that" with the notable exception of Spock shooting Kirk onto Delta Vega. I only had four problems with this movie: 1. The lens flares. This isn't really a Star Trek issue as it is becoming more common with all new movies and TV 2. The Enterprise's f-ugly nacelles. Every other external part of the ship I could have accepted, but those nacelles just seem wrong somehow, they don't quite mesh with the rest of the ship to me 3. The "water treatment plant" engineering. I can understand The Powers That Be wanting a huge complex area to be engineering, in fact that makes complete sense considering the complexity of the ship, but make it a Star Trek huge engineering! With pulsing warp core(s), lots of consoles and blinking lights. The engineering they showed had a concrete floor, steel pipes and hardly a console in sight. 4. I thought Scotty's character was a little too "comic relief". I know he is played by Simon Pegg so it is a little understandable but it went a little too far. Maybe if they got rid of the little alien I wouldn't have minded as much. All in all a great movie, once it comes out on DVD/Blu-Ray I'm going to need a bigger TV.
Reviewer : Indefatigable Rating : 0
Review : Wow! That's really the only way to describe it. This was some film, an absolute spectacular. OK, so why have I given it no stars? The answer is simple, it just isn't Star Trek. I don't like the concept of rebooting a great franchise like this. I loved the film on its own merits (my vote in the poll was "It ROCKS!") but it isn't Star Trek any more. There seems to be too much borrowed from other sci-fi. They laid on a spectacular and they got it. Unfortunately, they lost something key to the whole franchise. Star Trek is just about the only imagined future that I think real people might live in, people who have families, work 9-5, go to football matches and go to the Moon to see the museum where Humans first landed. We lost that universe when they made this film. Sure, there were some good points. Simon Pegg actually sounds Scottish (I've lived there, and he does). Zachary Quinto was excellent as Spock, and it is perfectly believable that he could become the Spock we know. They brought Captain Pike in. We had the sounds of the ship and the original transporter sound effect. Best of all, the music at the end. But the failed points, the Uberships, the needless overcomplication of designs to make them look "cool", the character changes, especially to Kirk, were just wrong. Red matter was bad - I presume it was very very dense to create the black hole, but I just don't know. The worst, though, was the new Enterprise. To me, Matt Jefferies' design is *the* Enterprise, and the revamp just looked wrong. Sure, a great design, but just wrong for what she was. OK, that was a five-star film, but a zero-star Trek film. It's official, Star Trek has jumped the shark. Why didn't they give us a TNG film (Picard's last mission before he retires to become an ambassador - a Star Trek VI for TNG), a DS9 film (the Dominion return through the wormhole, Prophet Sisko has to stop them), a Voyager film (Starfleet develop quantum slipstream drive, Janeway uses it to return to the Delta Quadrant), a crossover film (I'll leave it to your imagination), or even *heaven forbid* an Enterprise film (Archer and the Romulan War). Instead, we got this. One thing alone could have saved the film. A spatial vortex opens up, and out pops a sleek ship of apparent Federation design. It hails. "This is Captain A.N. Other of the Federation Timeship Enterprise-Q. I'm from the 29th Centuary, and I'm here to fix history."
Reviewer : SuperSaiyaMan (Robert Barrows) Rating : 5
Review : Just an excellent movie.
Reviewer : Literalist Rating : 4
Review : When most people hear the term "reboot", they shake their heads and say, "oh, it can't be good!" Well, Star Trek XI is an exception. I liked Zachary Quinto and Karl Urban as Spock and McCoy - they really fit into those characters well, alternate universe or not. The re-design of the Enterprise is OK, as is Nero and his thirst for revenge. However, I cannot accept the numerous nits in the film, especially the location of Delta Vega and the travel time to Vulcan. Also, how can Kirk go straight to captain from cadet? I felt that was a bit rushed. When taken as a whole, still a good Trek movie.
Reviewer : EMH22 Rating : 5
Review : I went to see this on May 8th fully expecting a "modern Action film", which it was in a way. At first I would have given this a 3, but when I went to see it again multiple times, it grew on me. I love the music and Nero's character, but I think he should have had more screen time. There is little more to be said other than that the Enterprise should not be 1,000ft long as this is insane.
Reviewer : silaku Rating : 5
Review : I am a trekkie. And while largely punitive of the new Trek because of its deviation from the original, overall, I am glad the franchise is back. Sure, we get legions of fellow fans of the show hating the new film because of its inconsistencies and not being "Trek" enough, but as far as I am concerned, I am grateful that it has returned. Refreshed, reimagined, and redefined. Plus, I think Karl Urban is totally hot. Hihihi.
Reviewer : Quintin Scott Rating : 3
Review : Loud, bombastic, ultimately numbing, "Star Trek XI" set out to be the mother of all reboots but instead turned into a pale imitation of "Battlestar Galactica" that happened to have Kirk, Spock and McCoy in it. The Hotrodaprise pales in comparison to Jeffries's masterpiece whilst the "coincidental improbabilities" of everyone coming together made me cringe at every turn. There is no way in Gre'thor that CADET Kirk is going to be granted the captaincy of the Federation's flagship. NO WAY! Every military person I've spoken to has called it "impossible" or some variation thereof. The only thing that saves this movie from a straight-up zero because of that bulls**t ending is the appearance of Nimoy's Spock, the performances of Urban, Pegg, and Quinto, and the dedication to Gene & Majel. But, before I end this, I just want to say one more thing: every time-travel/alternate timeline combo story that we've had in Star Trek history has always had the characters set things back to the preferred timeline. In "XI", we have Spock PRIME not even attempting to fix it. From Archer to Janeway, they would have found some way to fix. Vulcan isn't supposed to be gone. Welcome to the Abramsverse. May the Great Bird of the Galaxy have mercy on our souls.
Reviewer : ColdFusion Rating : 3
Review : From the start, I enjoyed the film overall, and managed to go almost 2 months avoiding knowing what happens to the point where I could see it (you won't believe how busy I've been and I'm quite a trek-addict). A lot has been said in the other reviews so I won't go on too long. I left the movie not really knowing what to think, but the destruction of Vulcan really scarred the remainder of the movie, because I needed time to digest the fact that we had just hit the reboot button. Some say maybe it needed doing, but I really don't think it did even though I know that's just an opinion. Regardless, like many people I was expecting an "undo" button to be pressed at some point by the end of the film, and was actually a bit disappointed when it didn't happen, this marred my experience because Trek is all about the continuity. There was plenty of scope in the already-changed lives of the new crew for a reinvigoration without shattering the entire futures-past of the franchise..... the bottom line is, how can a film that erases the events of Amok Time get the all-thumbs up? Otherwise, I think I agree with just about every other reviewer, Karl Urban was SUPREME as McCoy. Just perfect in every way. Apart from him and Pegg as Scotty, the performances were all new, rather than homages to the original cast... noteably this may be because the original actors of those two particular crewmen are dead, and as such, their new portrayal was taken with reverence, rather than renewal. And I think that's a bit of a shame in a way, one because it diminishes the otherwise solid performances of the other cast members, but two because it would simply have been better that way.
Reviewer : Steamrunner92 Rating : 5
Review : This movie was incredible! I loved the entire thing. It had so many contrasting moments between laughter, drama, and absolute terror - I am so glad I got to see it in the movies! Just two things: -1. The visuals were just a little too complex. They were great, don't get me wrong, but they could have been cleaned up just a little to better understand what was going on, for example, the Kelvin vs. the Narada. Also, later in the movie, when panning out from one of the Enterprise's windows, why did the camera flip upside-down? It just seems a bit much. -2. Lens flare. I probably walked out of that theater with cataracts. A few here and there were nice visual touches, but after a while, it's like staring at Locutus, only instead of a laser pointer, there's a flashlight. All in all, a fantastic movie. In the afterlife, J.J. Abrams and Gene Roddenberry will probably be sharing a glass of Bloodwine or Romulan Ale over this movie.
Reviewer : Captain 8472 Rating : 3
Review : There is one thing that keeps bugging me to no end. It aggravates me as I am a trained mechanical engineer. The designs for the engineering hulls of both the Kelvin and the new Enterprise. First: rivets. There is no point to use something so out dated, inefficient and useless as rivets on a vessel meant to go into space when compared to welding. They are an extra part you have to manufacture, require two people to install and don't create an air tight seal. Lets not even discuss the fact they ran along the beams, connecting nothing to the beams. Second: the web of I-beams. They made the entire engineering section look like the ceiling of a warehouse. There was no reason to have those every where like that. Exposed, no walls, nothing but grating style deck plates. Third: bulk heads. The ENTIRE hull looked like it had no compartmentalization. This means that one rupture or breach to the hull exposes all of the primary hull to hard vacuum. No one there lives (same goes for Nero's ship). Fourth: warp core. Where was it? All I saw looked like liquid storage, plumbing and water filtration. Where was the matter-anti-matter reaction chamber? Where is all the power coming from. All in all, decent plot, excellent acting, death-trap ships.
Reviewer : Cailus Rating : 2
Review : For me, Star Trek XI is like a sandwich with fine tuna, fresh bread, and lovely salad...but horribly burnt. The effects were, for the most part, excellent. However, the interiors of the Enterprise are a big disappointment. It all seems too white, too generic, and the engineering section doesn't look dissimilar to an old steam ship. If they'd made more effort to individualise the bridge stations, and actually show that the engine room is from the 23rd century, I'd be happer. The acting, too, was excellent. Although Chris Pine wasn't particularly impressive, there were hints that when he grows into the role, he'll actually turn out quite well. All the other actors, however, was fantastic in their roles, and I can certainly see this crew living up to the hype. Unfortunately, the letdown are the writers. The first 20 minutes or so, as the Kelvin is attacked, are absolutely and undeniably incredible. The Academy piece is decent, certainy. However, this movie collapses for me when, ironically, the Enterprise starts moving. The writers turn the tough security officer Chekov into pathetic comic relief, invent a bizarre relationship between Spock and Uhura (seriously, why the hell did they do that?), create classic bad science (it works because...er...because we say it does!) and then we have Nero. Now, I'm sorry, but I'm tired of insane villains, we've really had enough of them. Shinzon was a refresher, a sign of hope, but then we get Nero. Nero, who doesn't even LOOK Romulan. Nero, who is insane, but is apparently still able to convince thousands of crewmen to commit xenocide and follow him into a war. About half of Trek movie villains are apparently genocidal maniacs, and really, that might work once or twice, but for pete's sake... And of course, really, look at Kirk. The guy is a CADET. A CADET. On Starfleet's newest starship, launched from the very heart of the Federation, the best they can find are a load of cadets for a command crew. And in the end, what does Kirk even do that's so special? He takes command, sneaks up to Narada with technobabble, does a load of shooting, finds Pike, does more shooting, and is then rescued. For that, which is exactly what a security squad could have achieved, he is given a field promotion to Captain. Yeah, right. So, overall, the writers took the potential for an incredible Trek film that could have equalled Wrath of Khan, and turned it into a pretty good action flick. I can only hope that they use different writers next time, because there is fantastic potential here.
Reviewer : Pulpytine Rating : 5
Review : Absolutely fantastic film. Loved every minute of it. Gave Trek a much-needed reboot but was done so as to not erase canon, as was done with Batman Begins. The actors cast as the crew did a fantastic job, but I have to give special props to Chris and Zachary. They faithfully portrayed Kirk and Spock but also brought their own little bit into the mix. As for Nero, I thought he was a rather good villain. He was driven not by a quest for power, but by revenge, pure and simple. Revenge can really be a good motivator, one that can be even stronger than seeking power.
Reviewer : Jason Conroy Rating : 1
Review : I am ambiguous to this new and "improved" Trek. I saw the movie in the theatre but now it is coming out on DVD soon I thought I would throw in my two cents. First of all I will say I was a little worried about these young guys and girl playing characters that are so ingrained in my childhood but I was sorely mistaken, they were wonderful in their portrayals and they are great actors to boot. Ok, down to the dirt. This story has plot holes you could ram a sun through. From the very beginning I was confused. A supernova threatening to destroy the galaxy? Did someone not even bother to talk to a first year university science student? They happen all the time, natural life and death cycle of stars of a certain size, anyway, it destroyed Romulus so it HAD to be Romulus' own star that exploded. This is impossible, only certain stars of a certain size at the end of their life would go supernova. These don't just HAPPEN, they take centuries to end their lives, the ancient Romulans even with primitive technology wouldn't have colonized Romulus knowing that in a few centuries it would explode. Like it or not the director threw 40 years of Trek out the window and start new, and to explain this huge change? Time travel 20 year ago (movie time) changed history. But did it? Or at least that much? So we are to believe the destruction of one starship (space is a dangerous place and bad things can and do happen to ships all the time) and the death of really only a few crewmen (most got away) would change technology and the history of Starfleet that much? Certainly changes on a more personal level would happen especially to Kirk who's father was killed saving everyone. I would buy that, but everything else? The changes to the Enterprise? it being build in Iowa? the fact that Engineering looks like a concrete warehouse? Et al? That brings me to the set? AHHH, I'm blind, I'm blind! What is that? Looks like an old eposide of Buck Rogers! Completely white and touchscreens? What? Sure, I would expect touchscreens in the 22nd century since we already have them but in the 1960s they couldn't imagine that and so they weren't in the original Trek, hell, they look more advanced then TNG, DS9, Voyager. How could blowing up one starship change things so much? I might be able to accept it better if everything was so shiny and bright :S I won't go into all the plot holes but I think you have understood my basic objections to the movie. Now, what I really liked, obviously I spoke of the characters and actors they were great. The CGI of the Kelvin battle sequence was truely stellar, amazing more like it. The Kelvin looked great (perhaps too large for a ship of that time?) and I liked the fact that they seemed to do some tie in to have it as a stepping stone between the original Star Trek, the bridge, etc was more like I was expecting (technology wise) from this movie until they went all Buck Rogers on me. Even through the Romulans were in the previous movie they didn't have the starring role and I really like that they finially became the bad guys they deserved to be, how many Klingon movies can you do? (Without throwing God in there somewhere :P) Great fight sequences and I absolutely LOVED the hand phaser and how it rotated to red and blue, very fun. One last complain, I promise, Vulcan is gone? only a few thousand Vulcans left? Wow, they were my favorite! How can they do that? Sigh Anyway, so they really used this to introduce the characters and set the "tone" but they didn't have the essience of Trek in there with the moral subtitles we have all known and which made ST great, it's a summer action movie for the masses. I hope they make more of both this new Trek but I still want more Next Generation era movies. I like all Trek, and I DO like things in this movie but I refuse to give up 40 years of Trek so Abrams can "Re-imagine" Trek, it's a rest, lets not play on words here. So that is my take, I am sure people will argue it or make up explainations to justify my complains and sure, please go ahead, that is what is great about Trek but this is just my opinion. Enjoy!
Reviewer : Chris Brown Rating : 1
Review : Hated it. now before the spamming starts let me explain. Im a long time fan of science fiction and star trek. i grew up on the star trek movies then TNG. I lived my childhood fed by the STOS reruns, movies 4-6 then 1-3 (was born in 1980). shatner IS kirk. Nimoy IS spock. when the movie previewed, i gave it a chance. didnt even mind the drastic changes in the enterprise's appearance. but there were some lines i had to draw. First: Kirk's father died to protect him. this was a nice action packed start but i believe it started the downward spiral of the movie. Kirk became an attention starved orfan who destroyed what would of been and old vintage car in OUR time! im a car guy who dares someone to point of a good movie where the car was destroyed in the first ten mins. jkjk. Second: Spock, a man from an emotionless people, is sleeping with and having a PASSIONATE relationship? WTF?! spocks lack of emotions what a part of who he was! a part of what made the humorus moments concerning him funny! and it was the first thing this movie had thrown out the window! the fact that Nimoy himself had anything to do with it disturbs me still. third: red matter. need i say more? forth:they destroyed vulcan. WTFWTT?!?!? Vulcan and earth were the main founding worlds of the UFP! i honestly would of like it a lot more if they did fix the timeline back. too many things were changed. i understand a big change IS what they were going for, but i think i lot more of the original material should of been kept. this movie rewrites ALL of star trek from its setting time on-ward. the movie was ok, it just shouldnt of had the "Star Trek" name.
Reviewer : StarTrekAnMore Rating : 1
Review : It seems that there are a few "classics" that are being 'rebooted' (ST), 'reimagined' (BG) or 'revived' (DW) with various degrees of success. One was pulled off admirably (ironically the British show "Doctor Who"), one was an unmitigated failure (Battlestar Galactica) and one (Star Trek) falling somewhere in the middle. As action and science fiction, ST XI was pretty good. As good (or even just adequate ST) not so good. First, the not so good. No more Vulcan and no more Ch'Rihan/Ch'Havran. James T. Kirk as an adrenaline junkie. The Enterprise bridge set. The Kobayashi Maru scene. Spock and Uhura?? The good: The Enterprise exterior, Dr. McCoy, Zach Quinto's resmblance to Nimoy's Spock. There is something called the 'willing suspension of disbelief' This is something that casual and hard-core trekkers and trekists should have tried to bring to this movie. I know I sure tried when I first saw it. Judging from the dichotomy of opinions, not many others did. Analysing the movie on several levels, the first and foremost being to make money for Paramount. That it did. As a 're-boot' of a classic American it probably succeeded at that too, bringing new fans into an old franchise. Veiwing it in that light, trying to stay true to the "Wagon Train to the Stars" that Gene Roddenberry envisioned while trying to inject new life into it and hence new fans, it is a difficult proposition at best. It seems that the reaction to this ST movie is kind of like ST-TMP, trekkers were just so happy and overwhelmed at the first new ST since the animated series that expectations were very high and hence a high level of disappointment at the actual results (although the director's cut and extended cuts are an improvement over the theatrical version). The same thing happened here, the first new ST since "Voyager" and expectations were up as was the disappointment (and ire) being up. The Star Trek Movies took a bit to really get going, so it looks like it will be with this reboot. It also did not help that this movie was laboring under the 'odd-numberd jinx'. Let's see where to new cannon takes us and hopefully we as ST fans have an open enough minds to give this a chance.
Reviewer : bruce Rating : 1
Review : great actors to take on these parts. the whole story made no sense. destroy Vulcan in the past. what happens to all the stories that have already been written or used in the tv shows about Vulcan? this was just silly. destroying Romulus also was a wasted event, since it basically destroys Romulian stories in the future. they will be a very weak power. then it was just dumb how the dropped Kirk on the same planet where older Spock was and they just found each other out of all the territory of this planet. making Kirk captain when he was just getting out the academy was also dumb. there was great action but the whole story was so disjointed. I hope they reset some of the history, maybe in a book and just send the movies on with a return to most of the past historical storyline.
Reviewer : Red(dwarf) Matter Rating : 0
Review : What can be said that hasn't been said before? Not a lot, but.... As sf/action-adventure this was so-so to ok. As ST, not so good. Not to say that there weren't good points. For one, the character of Dr. McCoy was just about spot on and Scotty wasn't too far off. Leonard Nimoy as Spock (Prime), of course. Now for the bad... no more Vulcan?? No more Ch'Rihan/Ch'Havran??? WTF?!?!?! Kirk as a hyperactive adreneline junkie?? Spock shagging Uhura?!?!? OMG!!!! The only way that any Trekiie, Trekker or Trekkist is going to take this (and susequent efforts) seriously is to say that this is a whole differnt timelime, an alternate reality, another dimension, or whatever technobabble term you choose to use. Otherwise this will drive you mad listing the plot holes and canon inconsistancies. The good news is: the sequel can only be better, right? All in all, the fan film "Of Gods And Men" is better than this. Respectfully submitted, RdM
Reviewer : Bob Rating : 4
Review : It's a fun movie to be sure. The visual effects were top-notch, the script nicely paced, and the music very well done, especially the retro end credits. Karl Urban and Zachary Quinto put in near-perfect performances as McCoy and Spock, respectively, truly embodying their characters. Leonard Nimoy, having had his role for 40 years, is naturally flawless. As far as summer popcorn blockbusters go, this is a definite winner, filled with plenty of excitement, wit, and highly entertaining to boot. But is it Star Trek? Not really. You'll find a glimmer of the traditional Trek human-nature study, when all the characters debate the consequences of the alternate timeline, and "Destiny" as a whole, but it's all too brief. From a design viewpoint, I'm undecided regarding the unusually-proportioned new-look Enterprise - it's not as terrible as some claim it is, but neither is it brilliant. Adding to that are quite a few plot holes, inconsistencies and improbable coincidences (meeting Spock on Delta Vega comes to mind). Kirk goes straight from cadet to captain after seizing command of the ship and disobeying orders. Chris Pine's Kirk is somewhat unlikeable, although his offer to assist Nero near the film's end shows that Kirk has indeed matured. Nero himself is slightly uneven and lackluster as a villain, although his motivation and genocidal rage are apparent enough. Half of Starfleet Academy is wiped out when the Narada decimates the fleet over Vulcan, yet we get no further mention of that. Morals, continuity, and indeed, logic, have been abandoned for the sake of gung-ho action and thrills. Still, none of this is really enough to mar the experience while the movie is in progress. As a reboot and action romp, then, Star Trek XI succeeds, but as a Star Trek movie, it doesn't quite cut it. I'll be waiting to see how well JJ Abrams handles the sequel.
Reviewer : Richard Rating : 1
Review : This film is a decent sci-fi action film, but quite a poor Star Trek film. The acting and FX are of a high quality, but the writing and characterisation ranges from irritating to confused to lazy. New Kirk is a particular lowlight as he's a smug, moody git with all of the charm of a self-sealing stem bolt - a truly awful character. Obviously commercial factors led to the inclusion of the TOS setting and characters, but in Trek terms it's an utterly self-defeating endevour; why not make New Star Trek new rather than simply using the aesthetic aspects of the original series for something that in spiritual terms bears no resemblance to proper Trek?
Reviewer : hi Rating : 5
Review : Awesome movie. The new actors do an amazing job playing the original cast. Really excellent.
Reviewer : Romanul Rating : 3
Review : An average SF movie and a poor ST movie. Why a poor ST movie? Because it seems to disrespect much of what ST is (for good or bad). Why an SF average movie? The action is good, the special effects are great but the whole story is really hard to believe( yes, even for a SF movie). A 20 some year old immature youth leading the greatest ship in the federation despite breaking all the rules? THe chief engineer (Checov) is only 17 years old. It's like the whole ship is run by kids and it makes it so hard to take the universe seriously. At times you get the feeling it's a parody. It's a shame really. On the bright side, I am so happy that this is a BO hit. It means ST is not going to die(yet) and maybe, just maybe we will get a movie/ TV show with the old school ST. I can dream, right?!
Reviewer : A Sci-Fi Fan Rating : 1
Review : Ever since TOS: "Mirror Mirror" the idea of other universes of Trek have been a core concept. I was intrigued by the idea of exploring one of them. Overall I am not happy with the first foray into this universe. The story was average at best. Admittedly, my main issues with the film may be considered nit picking at best, but as a hard core Trek fan they are none the less things that I found very bothersome. Red Matter, really? A better explanation of it can't be provided? Ok I guess I'll deal with it. The Enterprise in this time line is larger than the Enterprise-D in the standard time line (not to mention the size of the Kelvin). So I'm supposed to believe that much older technology is supposed to be able to engineer a ship of similar size as technology approximately a hundred years more advanced? Alright I guess that can be explained away. So you choose a brewery as the set to represent the engine room of this much larger more technologically advanced (than the standard time line) ship? That one is very hard to swallow. Warp nacelles now have an exhaust like a rocket engine? Wait, the "physics" of federation warp propulsion has been established. The standard universe and this new universe are likely one and the same up until the point where Nero travels into the past. Yet we also see the Kelvin with this strange nacelle exhaust port. Am I supposed to believe that the Kelvin uses a unique type of warp propulsion system that becomes the norm after Nero attacks? Sorry I don't buy it. I can't fathom what would go through a director's mind to have these kind of gaps in story and set choices. I still find the premise of a different Trek universe interesting. I'm curious to see how the Federation will progress with a diminished Vulcan presence, and how will it effect the Vulcan race. I have high hopes for the next installment. I'd really like to be able to give a Trek movie a better rating.
Reviewer : =NoPoet= Rating : 5
Review : Easiest five stars ever? This is quite simply a sensational reboot of a franchise that was being run into the ground by a lack of vision, repetitive storylines and a massive dose of time travel. While this film does jettison or destroy some continuity, are people seriously complaining about this given that Enterprise already re-wrote long-established history? I don't see how people think Trek has always been so consistent or cherished by the writers, because it clearly hasn't, not all the time. The special effects are stunning even on the small screen, I don't like the re-designed warp nacelles but other than that the ship has been considerably upgraded so that Starfleet ships no longer seem puny compared to the ships of other franchises, the re-designed warp speed effect looks amazing and creates a sense of ridiculous speed, plus the acting was fantastic throughout. The actors channel the originals but lend a new strength, passion and direction which I don't feel human Trek characters have had since TOS. The musical score is fantastic (another first for a Trek film). I don't know anyone who disliked this film, even my sister who hates Trek enjoyed it when her friend made her watch it at the cinema. When I go online I'm always seeing people bash the film, but when we left the cinema everyone was talking about how good it was.
Reviewer : Mike Rating : 0
Review : How bad is this movie? I got my copy from the the library and after watching it, returned it and demanded my money back! Very little to recommend this movie at all; Karl Urban stealing scenes as Dr. McCoy, Chris Pine is above adequate as Kirk and, of course, Lenord Nimoy as Spock (prime). The two biggest objections are the extermination of both Vulcan and Ch'Rihan (and presumably Ch'Havran ) as well. Billed as a reboot of one of the two most enduring SF franchises in the world, the only thing that should have been booted was JJ's gonads.
Add your own review

Copyright Graham Kennedy Page views : 10,278 Last updated : 1 Jan 1970