I'm givin' her all shes got Captain. .

Rating: 8/10 (13 May 2009)

Two-thirds of the way through the movie 'Scotty' says something, and I realize, that's a part of his personality - and that even as a die hard Trek fan - I never noticed that about him before!
Looking at the movie 'quotes' I see there is a lot of dialog in Star Trek. The plot seems a poor rehash of Wrath of Khan. It doesn't make a lot of sense and with Star Trek the plot is usually carved in stone as a giant monolith. While the story doesn't make sense the crews actions and emotions do. In the best movie, Star Trek IV, the plot makes sense but it isn't taken too seriously. For what it's worth, I've alway been partial to Star Trek V too, a movie that for me went where no movie's gone before.
I've loved Star Trek since watching reruns growing up. A baby sitter must have sat me down in front of the original episodes when I was 3 or 4 corrupting me. The people who made this movie seem to love Star Trek too. Star Trek isn't perfect. . . but parts of it certainly were. Perfection. I'd like to see this crew return, not just for another movie but to a weekly TV show. The 'alternative-timeline' I think, makes it possible. Who wants to watch an adventure where you know what's going to happen in advance?
I was never quite comfortable with the humor. I enjoyed it, as well as the banter, but didn't laugh out loud? The closest being when Chekov couldn't pronounce 'Vessels' or something. One reviewer wrote (rightly pointing out the lack of fan-fare at Vulcan's destruction) "Exciting, inviting and a little bit frightening (the new Chekov's accent is as unsettling as any planetary destruction)." There was room for this movie to be embarrassing. I was certainly cringing right away. The longest cringe I've ever held in my life was when Kirk was being born. Kirk is being born while his father is going down with the ship - defending a Starship from attack. Was it some kind of extended baby-making commercial? A cheap attempt to pull on our heart strings, to inject some 'heart' into the movie? I might have been better with it if there were more humor here, say, in the manner in which race car driver 'Ricky Bobbys' birth is given levity. Then, 10 or 20 minutes into the movie a giant 'Star Trek' logo fills the screen. How long can one human being be stuck mid-cringe? I did enjoy Star Trek immensely, but it may be due to oxygen deprivation from having my face stuck in one position for 30 minutes.
I never knew Kirk was a genius. I remember an episode (that the original motion picture, and Star Trek IV, were loosely based off) where Kirk outsmarts a computer. Spock comments, "A dazzling display of logic." Kirk says, "You didn't think I had it in me, did you Spock?" Spock replies, "No". Here Kirk outsmarts Spock in one scene. No easy task. Star Trek does a good job making Kirk more human and at the same time building him up to almost God-like legendary status. Kudos to the movie makers.
One reviewer wrote, "Star Trek was the last refuge of an old-fashioned style of acting, more commonly seen in old black-and-white Hollywood movies. It was fake, but it was classy." The new movie seems more realistic. Another review said (and he did intend it as sarcasm), "It moves at a breakneck speed. Sometimes you aren't even sure what's happening on-screen but you are sure that you like it." There's meaning here but it comes in snippets of information. For example, early in the movie the villain says something but it doesn't really make sense until late in the movie. It is fast and furious in most parts. The action scenes do blend in well with the rest of the movie. Related or not, it's said IQ scores in industrial (TV watching) nations are rising.
It's one thing to like all the violence and fighting, action and special effects... I certainly did... it's another thing to say it's right. Star Trek reminded me of 'Cloverfield' in that sense. When I watched Cloverfield (also by JJ Abrams) I was thinking 'I love this movie' but maybe I shouldn't be? I give Cloverfield 10 out of 10. The visuals in the movie did make me sick. What's next? a movie has to make us laugh, cry, throw up for two days before it's good? It was only with thinking about Cloverfield, after the movie, that I realized what it was about: the bravery of the characters in the movie. Each braver than I would be, but believable.
I suspect there's something slightly 'American' about Star Trek. Star Trek is global so I suspect this is 'forgiven' (probably not the right word to use). It's also about the whole field of Science Fiction (some would say it's mostly about friendship). It is still 'idea' fiction, even if only in part. There's a story about how writers Isaac Asimov and John Campbell were invited to the moon launch. They shared a moment because they both knew science fiction played a small part in paving the way for the space program.
I know each generation forgets about the past, surpasses the previous generation... I know they are going to forget all about us... In 200 years they'll be saying in winter we put a tree in our houses and stood around and worshiped it. I don't mind being forgotten about. That would be a good thing. My opinion of the 20th Century and now the 21st is about what Bones McCoy's opinion of it would be. I know it is pride... and conceit... but it would be nice if there were a 'Star Trek' in that future.