Movie 146: Star Trek

Star Trek (2009) by J.J. Abrams
starring Chris Pine & Zachary Quinto



In a nutshell: More satisfying than I ever expected it would be, but it will only be rememered if it re-ignites this dormant franchise

Quick synopsis: A very unhappy Romulan miner travels back in time in an attempt to avenge the demise of his planet by destroying the federation years earlier

Content: It has been a long time since Star Trek has been more relevant than its more ubiquitous cousin, Star Wars. And for a period in the early 00’s it seemed like the stewards of each franchise were determined to run their respective charges into the ground. But, by all reports, the new J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie was enough to re-energize the franchise and them some. For now, leaving Star Wars in its dust as Star Wars fanatics lament their series’ lack of any quality new material since the early 80’s. So, I had to go check out Star Trek and see what all the hype was about.

One of the biggest downfalls of each of the five Star Trek television series was that they were beloved by a narrow group of core fans, but did not appeal to the masses. This narrow group of core fans was enough to make movies worthwhile to produce, but even the movie franchise faded into irrelevance without quality ongoing television to back it up and provide it with new material. So the powers that be deemed that instead of continuing storyline that has spanned the numerous TV series and movies, it was instead time for a “reboot”. A reboot means that you basically start over from scratch, changing any key story elements that you wish (for example, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are a reboot of the 80’s/90’s batman films). While this strategy, if well done, had the potential to capture a new generation of fans, it was also bound to piss off the hardcore fans that have stuck through the franchise through thick and thin and consider its canon to be gospel. And in the hands of most writers/producers/directors that is exactly what would have happened. But every Star Trek fan in the world is seemingly thanking their lucky stars that this movie was put in the very capable hands of J.J. Abrams who has proved himself to be one of the smartest and most savvy television and filmmakers over and over again with Alias, LOST, Mission: Impossible 3, etc. And even when one of his projects hasn’t turned out to be of the highest quality, like Cloverfield, he still managed to build up so much hype for it that it was still a huge success.

So J.J. and his team (it would not be fair to give him all the credit as he seems to be one of those people who has built a team of the highest quality around him) came up with a solution that I was sure would not be enough to appease the most rabid of fans. He simply used one of the oldest and most troublesome tricks in the book. He had a character travel back in time from the end of the previous timeline (this really isn’t too much of a spoiler), change something, and all of sudden thing are ALLOWED to happen differently within the rules of the universe. Everything that happened in the previous tv series and movies still happened, and HAD to have happened to get to this point, yet they can still start over again on an “alternate timeline.” All of this was well and good for Star Trek newbies, but shockingly the fanatics seem to be welcoming this development with open arms. I think they are just happy to have hope for new life in the series, although they will explain their satisfaction by saying that there is precedent for “alternate timelines” in the old material.

So they were willing to accept the premise, but was the material itself any good? This is where opinions finally diverge. As a stand-alone action movie set in space, the film is really great. I was wrapped up in the action pretty much from start to finish. And the fact that characters were now allowed to die added a suspenseful edge to the film that is missing from other prequels. I have never really seen the original Kirk/Spock TV series, so I wasn’t trying to make sure that characters we were witnessing in their youth were the same ones we remembered from decades earlier. I had no basis for comparison. But the Kirk and Spock that I was introduced to were likeable and well-developed characters. The supporting cast is left largely underdeveloped, but ther really wasn’t time for all that. That should be left to a new TV series when and if that comes together. A few characters, specifically Scottie, dangerously bordered on comic-relief caricatures, but I’m willing to let it slide because this movie was about Kirk and Spock.

A few Star Trek fans with whom I have compared notes expressed frustration that the Star Trek in the film was a good action movie, but it wasn’t Star Trek because it lacked the science fiction and philosophical elements that have been the backbone of Star Trek since Gene Roddenberry dreamed it up. To them I say, give it a chance. This type of movie was necessary to get the story going again and to give future storylines a jumping-off point. If the series continues (which I have to think it most definitely will after the success of this movie) and doesn’t return to its roots, then complain. But for now, let J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek do it job, reignite interest, and open up endless possibilities for the future. Sit back and enjoy these “new” characters boldly going where no man has before, that is except for alternate universe version of themselves.

Rolling Rankings:
1. My Cousin Vinny (#138)
2. The Return of the King (#139)
3. Vicky Cristina Barcelona (#143)
4. Star Trek (#146)
5. Collateral (#142)
6. Role Models (#144)
7. Zack and Miri Make a Porno (#137)
8. Religulous (#140)
9. Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist (#141)
10. Bottle Shock (#145)

key:
masterpiece
excellent
good
mixed bag
more bad than good
garbage