Going Boldly
“Star Trek” isn’t just a perfect reboot of an old — and lately, tired — franchise, it’s a perfect sci-fi thriller. In fact, it’s a damn-near perfect little summer popcorn movie. And more. This will be a spoiler-free review, but I’ll put up a spoiler discussion in just a bit.
The picture “Trek” reminded me of most, strangely enough, was Steven Soderbergh’s “Ocean’s 11.” That was a movie with a constant swirl of color and thrills and a crackling ensemble cast, with each character having something important to contribute to the action. The “Star Trek” which director J.J. Abrams has given us is one where even Uhura, finally, is more than legs in a mini skirt. In fact, she has one of the film’s more powerful moments, when she’s forced to hold herself together in public in a way that’s nearly… Vulcan in her self-control.
The plot is simple — er, simply convoluted. There’s time travel involved. The fun isn’t in the resolution, which any smart viewer can see coming a mile away. The fun is in watching this ensemble come together, in sometimes unexpected ways. And the time travel motif gives Abrams freedom to change stuff up. Long time fans will notice — and, I think, enjoy — the differences. Newbies will just enjoy it, period.
The drama hinges on one terrible, stupid catastrophe. It’s a terrible, stupid catastrophe tragic on an epic scale, and for one character, on a very personal level, too. I found myself wondering how the crew of the Enterprise would use time travel to “fix” things and save the day. As time started running out, however, an extra level of dread kicked in as I realized the terrible, stupid catastrophe would be allowed to stand. It’s a bold move by the filmmakers, going somewhere the Star Trek universe has never gone before. The only time travel in the movie is accidental and occurs basically off-screen, and the characters must live with the results. There’s no cheating here.
And that’s about as much about the plot as I can talk about without revealing a bunch of spoilers. So let’s move on to the cast.
Chris Pine: He owns James T. Kirk like James T. Kirk owns the bridge of his starship. The swagger, the gleam, the ‘tude, the intense interest in what’s under that (i.e., any) skirt… Pine has it all. All without descending into parody or simple imitation of Shatner.
Zachary Quinto: He’s Spock. Younger, so his inner human/Vulcan turmoil is more on the surface — not that there’s anything wrong with that. I’d say more, but I found myself so accepting of Quinto (who I’d never seen before in anything) in such an iconic role, that I’m not left with anything to add. This is Spock.
Karl Urban: He comes the closest to doing an imitation, of Deforest Kelly’s “Bones” McCoy. But he’s given so many great lines, and delivers them so perfectly, that you just won’t care. He damn near steals the movie.
Simon Pegg: An inspired choice to play Scotty, and his constant questions about where to find a decent meal fully explains the greatly-expanded girth of James Doohan (the original Scott) over the years. His manic genius is, well, genius.
Zoe Saldana: The above-mentioned Uhura. My latest movie crush. There’s quite a bit of character development, and even some plot, riding on her slender clavicles. And she carries it all effortlessly. Comparing her to Nichelle Nichols would be unfair, since Nichols — unfortunately — was rarely used as anything more than tasty, tasty eye candy.
John Cho: At first it was distracting seeing a Korean guy playing Sulu. Then he brought out his sword. Sweet!
Anton Yelchin: Chekov. Another scene-stealer, although with the least-defined role.
Eric Bana: Best Trek bad guy since Khan — which isn’t saying a whole lot, considering the intervening eight movies. But his job is to kill a whole bunch of people, then get killed himself. Both of which he does convincingly enough.
Oddly enough, I found the two “grown-up” Vulcans to be the most disappointing characters in the movie. This is doubly surprising when you consider that it’s Ben Cross, a fine actor, playing Sarek (Spock’s dad.) Maybe it’s just because Mark Lenard played Sarek for so many years on so many different shows, but I don’t think so. Cross somehow doesn’t bring enough gravitas. And it’s quadruply surprising that the “real” Spock, Leonard Nimoy, turns in his least-impressive performance in the part he created. Maybe it was bad direction, maybe it was his mostly-expository part, or maybe age has finally caught up to Nimoy. But if there’s a weak link in the casting, he was it. Oh, except for Winona Ryder. I have no idea what she was doing in this movie, and I’m not sure she did, either.
Giant kudos to Bruce Greenwood as Kirk’s commanding officer and (in some ways) surrogate father. Greenwood delivers the weight Nimoy and Cross should have, but didn’t. And he did so well enough to make up for the other two, and then some. When he says to young Kirk, “Your father was Captain for twelve minutes and saved 800 lives… Including yours — I dare you to do better,” it’s no spoiler to tell you that, of course Kirk does better. He’s James Tiberius Kirk, mothereffer.
Years ago, I reviewed the then-new “Enterprise” TV series, and argued that the original series worked because of “the Holy Trinity of Kirk, Spock and McCoy.” Re-watching the old show a couple years ago, I was amazed at how, from the very first episode, Kirk, Spock & McCoy formed such a tight unit. The new movie, I figured, would succeed or fail by how well it showed that camaraderie form and gel.
Well, let me tell you: Star Trek not only succeeds, it exceeds. Not because the reboot trinity is any better than the old one — it couldn’t be. It exceeds the original because, for the first time, the supporting cast is just as strong and just as integral. And when I say integral, I mean: integral to the movie, to each other, and most importantly, to the USS Enterprise.
Put simply: This is the Star Trek movie fans have been waiting for, going on 30 years now. It’s also the Star Trek movie newbies will still be watching 30 years from now. Or as my friend (and devoted Trekker) Charlie Martin wrote to me last night: “Best. Trek. Evah!”
A few questions:
First, is it okay for children? Mine have seen all the Star Wars and Lord of the Rings movies without many worries, so I’m pretty sure this is okay. And thankfully this one isn’t three hours long.
Second, I heard a lot about lots of flashing lights. All over the bridge, especially. The reason I want to know is because one of my sons is supposed to avoid strobes. So would this movie be likely to induce a seizure? I’d hate for him to miss out on this much less than I’d hate for him to have a very bad experience.
It’s too much for my three-year-old, but it’s on the same level as the original Star Wars. Anyone eight and up should love it. And anyone 14 and up should appreciate it.
Winona Ryder was the best part of this film!
Completely agree. I saw it Thursday night, and, two days later, I’m still stunned at how completely Chris Pine owned his role as Kirk. And you quoted the exact line, Stephen, from Captain Pike that gave goosebumps to my chill bumps.
100% satisfying on so many levels it should be illegal. Can’t wait to see it again.
Off topic, but whatever happened to Charlie Martin?
Just saw it this afternoon, and I did what I rarely do at the movies – applauded at the end. So did the rest of the audience.
Like Stephen, I enjoyed the audacity of the “time travel” part of the plot – once again, we’re going where no one has gone before. I have to disagree about Leonard Nimoy though; I very much enjoyed what he did in the show, even though much of it was expository.
Anyhow, a very satisfying movie indeed.
Zachary Quinto: … (who I’d never seen before in anything)
Then I strongly recommend the TV show Heroes. Quinto is absolutely delightful as the spectactularly evil supervillian who you can’t stop rooting for.
Off topic, but whatever happened to Charlie Martin?
Who?
Seriously, thank you for asking. I’ve had a chronic health problem for years — nothing critical, nothing that is life-threatening — and it’s taken up a lot of my time over the last couple of months. The current acute episode is *much* better, and I’m getting back into things and out of my own, um, navel.
The best part about this reboot, if you asked me, is that (assuming they have the huevos to keep to it) they’ve eliminated at least one of the things in the Star Trek universe that had gotten to annoy me most. Even more than the squishy Hollywood-pink unthinking communism, even more than Star Trek never has naked women.
But I ain’t gonna talk about it. Not until Steve has the with-spoilers discussion up.
Mwah hah hah hah.
I hate to be the one to say it, but Nichelle Nichols never was that great an actress. Not bad, no, but was arguably the least-talented of The Original Series (TOS) cast. Saldana, on the other hand, already has an established track record, including work with Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks in The Terminal, not to mention Drumline.
The most vital part of any great movie is great casting, and Stephen has already explained why the choices are great. I knew this would be a good movie in the same way I knew Fellowship of the Ring would be a good movie; I just read the casting list.
Just went back to read Stephen’s critique of Enterprise, which I originally missed. I agree with most of what he said, except with respect to Reed. For me, Reed always had echoes of James Bond, and Logan (excuse me) Wolverine. In other words; a man especially capable in personal combat and with weapons, expert in arms and demolition, and has a very shrouded past.
This character was very much not part of Roddenberry’s typically pacifist approach to Trek, which is why I found him interesting.
Actually the trilogy of Spock, McCoy, and Kirk were designed as Rationality, Compassion, and Decision. The first two explicitly and dramatically enunciated the arguments for/against any particular decision or ethical choice, while the latter (Kirk) represented commitment to a particular choice of action.
Still, Stephen’s analysis works pretty well, in that Enterprise was interesting in direct relation to how much the characters got on each other’s nerves.
On the other hand, the heavy-handed, lackwitted, mindless stupidity of Brannon/Braga’s inclusion of time travel helped doom the show. Enterprise was originally an attempted re-boot which failed due to the idiocy of those in control of the franchise. Did I mention twin-terror doltishness of Brannon & Braga yet?
They took an attempt to re-introduce the wonder of the “final frontier” and “brave new world” of the original series, and forced Enterprise into the bland, beige, banana-milkshake, politically correct straitjacket known as The Next Generation.
…And I’m wandering off-topic.
I’m looking forward to seeing something besides trailers, not to mention a least two or three more excellent movies from the re-booted franchise.
I gotta disagree with Eric Bana’s character bing the best villain since Khan. Bana’s character was fairly cookie cutter with little screen time. He had motivation, sure, but I would have liked to have seen more then the snarling evil-doer that was thrown on screen.
Seriously, he had less personality than the space cylinder from The Voyage Home.
Best TOS Trek movie villains in order.
Khan – Wrath of Khan
General Chang – The Undiscovered Country
Commander Kruge – Search For Spock
Lame-ass Space Cylinder – The Voyage Home
God – The Final Frontier
Voyager CVXMIIIIwhateverthehellitwas – The Motion Picture
I hate to be the one to say it, but Nichelle Nichols never was that great an actress.
Best singer of the bunch, though.
It was a good movie, and an enjoyable movie, but I didn’t think it was all that great. Mainly because I walked out of the theater thinking “Man, I miss DeForest Kelly”.
Most of the love of TOS is due to the original cast and the unique chemistry they had, even the best actors would be trying to play catch-up. (As opposed to something like James Bond/Sherlock Holmes – that would just be a matter of finding one actor to fill an archetype.)
I would’ve rather seen a new Enterprise with a new crew. (And Bruce Greenwood, best thing since sliced bread, as Captain.)
DF –
Greenwood is now the go-to guy for roles Cliff Robertson is too old for.
“Best Trek bad guy since Khan — which isn’t saying a whole lot, considering the intervening eight movies.”
Did you forget Christopher Plummer as the Shakespeare-quoting Chang, who was so badass he BOLTED his eyepatch to his skull? And do the TV shows count? Because Marc Alaimo as Gul Dukat was amazing.
Joe –
You know, I had forgotten about Plumber. Can’t even remember the last time I watched VI. So I’ll rip it onto the iTunes hard drive this afternoon, and make it available on the Apple TV for later.
the new Star Trek freakin rocks; love the new energy and and more “youthful” feel
Best Star Trek mashup ever.