I recently read somewhere that the near-perfect Rotten Tomatoes rating (96% as of this posting) received by the new Star Trek movie might have something to do with the “Oh! This doesn’t actually suck” factor. That is probably a fair assessment. Prequels can be risky, for sure, especially for a franchise with such an iconic place in our culture and as devoted a following as the Trekkies, and many people are highly skeptical that they will not be disappointed.
But with so many positive reviews, you can rest assured that Star Trek succeeds on more than just not sucking. The characters are full of charm due not only to the inspiration and back stories of the original Star Trek(s), but also due to the talent of the actors, writers, and director. The film was also surprisingly funny, while being full of good action – a potent combination in a summer blockbuster.
Chris Pine did an excellent job as James T. Kirk. And most of the other actors were well cast, I think.
Star Trek is not without its flaws, though. The plot (and certain lines of dialogue) can feel contrived, but its time-travel premise achieves the difficult feat of tying the movie to the previous incarnations of Star Trek, while simultaneously freeing it from them. Not only that, but director J.J. Abrams did an admirable job making the whole space-time continuum mumbo-jumbo not that hard to follow, probably by building on lessons learned from Abrams’ TV series, Lost, which features a similar time travel storyline.
The thing that really bothered me – and maybe this is just a personal thing – was the inordinate number of lens flares. This clip gives you an idea of what I’m talking about:
I swear there was a least one point in the film where the entire frame was completely bright white for a full second, if not more, and nothing else could be seen. But apparently Abrams has admitted to getting a little carried away, and explains he used them to convey that there was always something happening just out of frame, and that “the future is that bright”. Interestingly, they were all done on the set, and none were added in post – a fact that surprised me, and might (maybe) make it slightly less annoying for me.
In the end, though, seeing Star Trek was a really fun and enjoyable experience. I recommend it.
Been listening to this one a lot, pretty much the whole way through.
This novel was published after the Chilean-Mexican author's death, and I'm not even sure if it was entirely finished or not. It is broken up into five parts which, while connected, stand pretty much on there own. I have not yet made it to the grim part about the murders of hundreds of women in Mexico, so I have so far found it enjoyable and even funny despite some dark underpinnings. It's had a ton of critical praise, and I like it much more than my last foray into the violent novel genre: Blood Meridian.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I saw STAR TREK last night, and it was the most fun I’ve had at the movies in a long time. I thought Kirk was awesome — but I’m a little biased, as Chris Pine is the son of Richard Pine, who played Sgt. Getraer on “CHiPs”. Seriously though, his swagger came across effectively and I thought the series needed a good, swift kick in the pants. I grew up watching TNG (as you know) and certainly prefer this world to that of Star Wars (as you know). But I’m far from Trekkie-status and can appreciate this movie for all it is. I can’t wait for the next one.
Clint – Well said. Maybe it didn’t come through in my post above, but I loved it, too. I didn’t know that about the Chris Pine-CHiPs connection, though. Hilarious! And he was really good in this movie.