| Reviewer : |
Lucky Strike |
| Ave Rating : |
2.0000 for 2 reviews |
|
| Title : |
Star Trek |
Rating : |
 |
| Writers : |
Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci |
Year : |
2258 |
| 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. |
|
| Title : |
Star Trek |
Rating : |
|
| Writers : |
Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci |
Year : |
2258 |
| 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. |
|
