Star Trek
May 8th 2009 07:23
Remember back in 1999, when Star Wars Episode I came out? The expectations were higher than Mount Everest or even Olympus Mons. The result is debated, but that's not my point now. I'm talking about another rather fresh concept, that was also introduced with that movie: the prequel. After a few years of prequels and remakes a third eco-friendly movie making concept emerged: the reboot, when an iconic series of horror, sci-fi (or James Bond) is restarted, keeping the basic concepts and characters, but giving it a fresh perspective.
The first clever and well executed side of the new Star Trek movie is that it combines all the re- and pre- stuff in the first paragraph of this review. It's a prequel because it shows the young Kirk and the other classic crew members joining forces for the first time, it's a sequel (!) because time travel is in the epicenter of the story, and gladly for the studio and the fans it's a reboot, because it allows a chain of new movies that won't mess up the Star Trek Canon. Why? Because it's an alternate reality! The time travel stuff messed up a few major happenings, thus this Star Trek is a different Star Trek, the characters are familiar, but you'll only get a scrambled Déja Vu feeling, and the writers can go completely wild, and even if you're a hardcore Trekkie, you cannot really argue with the logic of it.
After this lengthy intro, let's jump in the thick of it. Is it any good? Simply put: Well, yes it is! Very much. It's an accelerated version of the franchise, with more humor, dynamic and action. Luckily the science besides the fiction hasn't fallen for this new age, it's still a quite tech-y movie, with enough quantum-disruptor-intrinsic-f ields to wet targeted mouths. For a while, fans of the original series and movies will look for similarities between the old and new actors, but after a few minutes they'll be just probably swooped in the story, with a few smiles emerging when something familiar is referenced, or when some iconic first meetings happen. At least that was the case with me and I'm not even a Trekkie.
The cast fits in nicely, in some places spot on. Karl Urban as Leonard McCoy stands out in this department, but that doesn't take away attention from Chris Pine or Zachary Quinto as Kirk and Spock respectively. The other performances are decent too, noone feels out of place, and since movie magic making is a teamwork, it's a good thing.
I've already praised the story indirectly, and let's leave it there, I don't want to spoil everything, but let me say that there are some very basic and striking elements that will probably evoke appreciative nods from you. It's definitely the funniest Star Trek movie so far, but it's not ridiculous, so don't worry. Well, one scene is on the border, but it's only a handful. The forging of the classic crew is both satisfiing and thought-provokingly banal.
The effects, creatures and the description of Space is both entertaining and trying to mimic reality, which in my opinion is the key to believability. Since 2001: A Space Odyssey, I wasn't merrier for the simple fact: there's no sound in Space. And although it's pointed out in an early scene that's about 3 seconds long, it's still there as a nuance that adds to the whole, and there are many small things here and there that resonate well with the original, and inject more advanced technology to the world.
JJ Abrams did a financialy very clever move by making this film, I must say brilliant. But he and the cast and crew deserves all the benefits and rewards because they did it by making quality entertainment, by lighting the spark of the sometimes fading movie magic.
| 56 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog