Star Trek
Added 11/21/2009
Since I'm a 64 year old Star Trek fan, I must say that this movie was GREAT!
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Disappointing, could have been MUCH better
Added 11/21/2009
This film was interesting only from a historical perspective. It lacks depth and substance, and tries to make up for a lousy plot and shallow characters with flashy, useless special effects that only detract, bore and annoy.
SPOILER PLOT. We see how the paths of Kirk, Spock, Uhura, Scotty, Chekov and Sulu intersected, beginning from Kirk's birth. This timeline is different from that of the regular, known Trek universe. A Romulan from the future has traveled back in time to avenge the blowing up the planet Romulus, which apparently the elder Spock promised to avert but wasn't able to. Now Angry Romulan wants to kill major players in Starfleet, as well as blow up Spock's native planet Vulcan, in the hope that Spock will suffer as Mr. Angry did (in the future). Angry does, in fact, manage to kill Kirk's father on a ship; Kirk's about-to-give-birth mother and the rest of the crew escape while Kirk's dad dies defending them.
A now adult young Kirk joins Starfleet under unusual circumstances. Kirk and his cohorts prevent Angry Romulan from doing any more damage, thanks to the wisdom of Elder Spock, who shows up in this timeline to advise Kirk and his own younger self. Elder Spock gives Scotty the formula about life-saving technology Scotty will develop in the future -- or DID develop in Elder Spock's future timeline. (You still with me?) In this film, the now new timeline is not repaired. Kirk's father still died defending his pregnant wife and crew, young Spock and Kirk's friendship gets off to a bumpy start, and more. However, at least there will be no more damage from Mr. Angry.
CHARACTERIZATION. New Scotty sounds just like the old one (but we don't learn anything about him). Kirk does a pretty good job as a younger version of Shatner. And Spock is decent, if lacking in the essence of what it means to be Vulcan. Uhura is competent and spunky; too bad the original Uhura was never given this many professional credentials and tasks that this younger version was given. (I appreciate the efforts to overcome the sexism of the original, first Star Trek.) However, all this cannot rescue this film. (By the way, what was Uhura doing French kissing Spock -- and Spock kissing her back? It didn't fit in anyplace, and certainly did not follow the original.)
DOWNSIDES. This film is more of a novelty and the glimmering of an undeveloped, good idea. It lacks the spiritual dimension, psychological sophistication and developed relationships between the characters of Star Trek's best films and TV episodes. Elder Spock telling younger Spock to "follow your feelings" doesn't constitute enough of a worthwhile message to redeem this flick, although it's always nice to see Leonard Nimoy. The soundtrack is relentless, noisy and distracting, and overshadows the dialogue at times. The visuals are simply ugly and busy, looking as though too many hand-held cameras are working overtime. I got dizzy watching all this tiring pointless activity, and had my finger poised on the fast-forward button. And due to the excessive and unnecessary action, this film needed a good editing; about 20 to 25 minutes less would have made it much better.
CONCLUSION. What I loved most about Star Trek's finest TV and movies were its messages, acting, and character development. This film just didn't do it for me. Die-hard fans may like and even love this flick. But for my taste, the best in Star Trek -- where there are socially redeeming messages, great characters, humor and depth as well as action -- is still Voyager, all seven seasons on TV.
0 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Best 2009 film I've seen..a must for Trekkies and casual fans
Added 11/21/2009
Not being a Trekkie, I had heard 'good things' about this movie. So I rented it and I loved it.
The story was great, the cinema photography was great, the special effects & just the visuals were great..but on top of that there is some really great acting and a story thrown in to boot. This is steps above the mindless put to brain to rest explosion films that we usually get these days.
This film was everything Transformers Revenge of the Fallen & GI Joe should have been. Those movies went for either toilet humor or smart-ass been there done that attitudes..
This movie has characters that we can care about. The Capt. Kirk , Spock and the whole crew of today actually had personality, which a lot of movies such as this have been lacking. You want Kirk to succeed in defeating Nero, you want Spock & Kirk to get on the same page.
What is great about this movie is you need not watch the old TV show youre not fan or any of the earlier Star Trek films. I watched this as a 'stand alone' film and it paid off big time for me. This is the kind of film that should get a sequel, but if not, the Star Trek movie franchise can end on a very high note.
This was a fun ride for 2 hours, with the outer space battles , Kirk being chased around by some really cool creatures & well, i hope this doesnt count as a spoiler but Leonard Nimoy does play an important role in this as well.
I can confidently highly recommend this movie, not just for die hard Star Trek trekkies, but for those that want to see a good science fiction action film that takes itself seriously, which is very unlike a lot today's science fiction movies. There are some funny and amusing moments but this is not a comedy or shot in bad taste to insult the franchise...
Brilliant film !
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
STAR TREK: A NEW GENERATION
Added 11/21/2009
I guess I should admit up front that I was and am an avid fan of Star Trek, TOS. In spite (or because) of this, however, both my 16 year-old daughter and I find this film thoroughly enjoyable.
To a degree, I understand some of the complaints about the character development not being up to expectations. I think there are two good reasons for this. First, the characters are young, and - particularly Spock - are still in their formative stages. Yes, in some instances, Kirk is "over the top," and Spock has yet to master the conflict inherent in his ancestry. Some forget that Vulcans have not eliminated emotions: they merely attempt to control them with an iron-willed - albeit intellectual - intensity. Similarly, have some of us forgotten the wildness of our youth? Clearly, nobody is born knowing how to do this. In both cases, however, there are moments in the film that reveal the men Spock and Kirk will become.
Second, there will be sequels. I remember one of the main criticisms of the first Harry Potter movie was the apparent lack of character development, but the writers remembered, if viewers did not, that there were six (now seven) films to go. You can't trot everything out in the first edition. Let's just hope the Star Trek writers also remember that the interplay between the three main characters is the heart and soul of the original series, and that this process will be one of evolution rather than metamorphosis. In short, if some viewers are just looking for hyper-extended plotlines overwhelmed with special effects, there are certainly enough examples of those circling about. Star Trek, TOS, on the other hand, is character driven, and early indications suggest that the present creators are aware of that.
The re-creation of Star Trek (re-boot doesn't quite cover it) was a formidable undertaking attendant with all sorts of baggage, passions, responsibilities, and expectations. It is also a film with two audiences to please - one familiar, one not; one young, one....well, you get the idea. With that in mind, those who have delivered the latest version of this (apparently) indefatigable saga should be commended for a job well done. For sure, it's a lot to squeeze into just two hours, but the final product is exciting, refreshingly familiar, and - most important - fun. It is well worth two hours of anyone's time. Some of us, in fact, would be grateful to age as well.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
WTF...Get Over it
Added 11/20/2009
Look... This is Star Trek.
This Is bold, original, and exactly what we needed as fans.
I was skeptic to begin with, and when I heard JJ Abrahms was directing it, I thought o.k. it could be good.
And It was. Star Trek has had enough long, preachy, movies dealing with issues and society, but we need something that was over the top, nonstop action, just so we could fall in love with the original characters all over again.
Even Majel Barret said before she died that Gene Roddenberry would have loved this, just because it was action packed. He knew what people liked.
I love this movie, it makes me feel good to be a star trek fan again.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
BOYCOTT THIS FRANCHISE
Added 11/22/2009
It is my opinion that this is hands down, the worst trash I have every viewed in my life.
It appears the current owners of this series have casually decided that the star trek franchise was somehow inadequate.
In an instant the entire series has been rewritten, and for what; the sake of profits and commerce?
The haphazard way in which the characters are throw together absolutely disgusts and sickens me.
Clearly no thought has been given to the foundations of this franchise.
To me, there is no more vivid example of greed and capitalism run amok; than this "film".
I will never buy another star trek item of any type for so long as I live, nor will I go to see any future star trek anything.
Something wondrous has been taken and turned it into a mere product exactly like all the other action/adventure garbage clogging up the theaters these days.
I encourage everyone who reads this review to boycott this movie and anything to do with this franchise.
0 out of 3 people found this helpful.
|
Fantastic blu-ray, and a great reboot of Star Trek!
Added 11/22/2009
Viewed on a Panasonic 50" plasma via a Panasonic DMP-BD80 through a Yamaha RX-V869 receiver (5.1 speakers) and an HDMI splitter/amp.
The movie was outstanding, both PQ and AQ are demo quality. AQ - most of the onboard scenes have a lot of ambient audio with background conversations, but the kicker for fans is hearing the 60's era sound effects coming through your speakers in gorgeous Dolby TrueHD 5.1 . You'll want to rewatch the movie just to hear the battle sequences.
PQ - just from the opening, you can see EVERY pore on Faran Tahir's face. And the movie is consistently as good. This is a movie that requires home viewing on a 50" or larger screen, and corect seating distance.
Outstanding and recommendable, although at this writing, there is no BD live content for the disc.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Good movie. NOT a good Star Trek movie.
Added 11/22/2009
Watch Video Here: http://www.amazon.com/review/RLAHFYUYN0Z1W Brief video review of this...movie. Full review will be up on YouTube shortly (stupid limits).
I had to cut my video review short because Amazon wanted me to, but I had a sentence in there that sums my thoughts up. This is a good movie. It's NOT a good Star Trek movie. That's essentially what it boils down to.
I didn't bother seeing this in theaters because quite frankly, I don't go to theaters to watch movies anymore. The idea of paying a DVD price to watch a movie with a bunch of other germ incubators, crying kids, ringing cell phones and noisy people is not appealing to me anymore like it was when I was a kid. Coworkers commented how much they enjoyed the movie, but when they told me that time travel was involved I knew this was going to go down hill very fast. When the Blu-ray came out I bought it with hesitation - but since I had RewardZone points, it was free, so I didn't lose much, thankfully. I'm so miffed at this movie that I'm going to just use bullets instead of a long out review.
= What Star Trek Does RIGHT =
- CGI is quite good at moments.
- Most of the actors did a good job playing the roles they were meant to (but see WRONG below).
- No campy machines like with Nemesis.
- Zoe Saldana.
= What Star Trek Does WRONG =
- CGI is apparently all they cared about, because the story is severely lacking.
- There was no love angle between Uhura and Spock. Never happened. Latent attraction, maybe early on. But never such a blatant display of affection.
- Chekov looks and acts nothing like the real deal. That actor was absolutely horrid trying to reprise what Walter Koenig made famous.
- Scotty was way over the top. Accent would come and go as it pleased, it was clear the guy was not Scottish in the least, and he was thrown in at the end with no real purpose to things.
- Old Spock felt misplaced and added for fanservice only.
- Pike was way too old. In the first episode of TOS he was a young, 20-something year old. If this took place prior to that maiden voyage, there's no reason for him to look that old. If it took place after that voyage then Spock/Kirk shouldn't have been cadets. Total discontinuity.
- Presents a "what if" scenario that totally and blatantly disregards the Star Trek canon in almost every way.
So what does this mean? If you liked Enterprise you'll probably like this one, because Enterprise in a lot of ways deviated from what made Star Trek famous too, but at least Enterprise had the decency NOT to use true canon characters when doing what it was doing. For $20 it's a fair price, but if you're a Star Trek fan, don't go in expecting a Star Trek movie. It's for people who want to see many things blown up and campy stunts. If you're into that type of stuff this movie will be perfect for you.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
